HC Deb 08 March 1967 vol 742 cc1523-31
The Minister of Transport (Mrs. Barbara Castle)

Mr. Speaker, with your permission and that of the House, I wish to make a statement.

I have been giving a great deal of thought to the implications for port development in this country of the container revolution in the deep-sea trades. In particular, my Department has been undertaking studies of the degree of concentration of traffic at individual ports necessary to maintain services of adequate frequency with economic-sized vessels.

As hon. Members will be aware, I have already authorised the provision at Tilbury of a major ocean container terminal and at Southampton of a container berth primarily for vessels calling en route to and from the Continent. Facilities under development at Grangemouth and at Felixstowe are or will be available for deep-sea as well as European trades.

Two other major proposals are before me for the development of a major new port extension at Seaforth, on the Mersey, to include a considerable container element, and for a container port on the Clyde at Greenock. These are schemes which would, in any event, take a considerable time to come to fruition. I announced last week, in reply to a Question by the hon. Member for Liverpool, Wavertree (Mr. Tilney), my authorisation of the conversion of the Gladstone Graving Dock, at Liverpool, to provide a deep-sea container berth to meet immediate needs, while the Clyde Port Authority is making similar temporary provision in Glasgow.

My studies of these two major proposals enable me to say that, so far as the overall pattern of port development in the United Kingdom is concerned, with particular reference to the provision of container facilities, there is a clear case for a major extension on Merseyside and a new container port at Greenock. I am informing the Clyde Port Authority that I have authorised its scheme for Greenock.

As regards the Seaforth project, there are still a number of questions which, within the overall approval of the scheme, I shall have to discuss and settle with the Authority, notably the number of container berths for which provision should be made and the financial justification for a grain terminal on the scale proposed. Decisions on those points will not, however, delay a start on the essential features of the Seaforth scheme.

Mr. Peter Walker

We welcome these proposals and also the fact that the Government are so rattled about the Pollok by-election as to make this announcement now. Does the right hon. Lady expect the Greenock scheme to be completed before or after the Humber Bridge? Can she give an assurance that if we arrange a by-election at Bristol she can go ahead with the Portbury scheme?

Mrs. Castle

I do not know why the hon. Member for Glasgow, Hillhead (Mr. Galbraith) put down a Question on this matter if he did not expect to have an answer. If he had not had the answer I have given this afternoon we know exactly what he would have done with my reply.

There have also been requests by hon. Members opposite that I should tell the House what is my assessment of the overall port developments needed in this country to meet the immediate developments in regard to containers. It was essential that both Liverpool and other ports concerned should be given as soon as possible the indications of their places in this overall scheme. This I have now done.

Mr. Rankin

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the statement she has just made about—[HON. MEMBERS: "Pollok."]—a container terminal at Greenock will be most warmly welcomed by the Clyde Port Authority and every trader on Clydeside, and particularly in my constituency of Govan, where Fair-field's Yard, now under Government sponsorship, has just obtained an order for £5 million in the face of world competition? Now we are building the container terminal. This will link up with the container ship.

Mr. Speaker

Order. Questions must be reasonably brief.

Mr. Galbraith

The right hon. Lady said that she was answering my Question, but, of course, she made a statement. The reason I put down my Question was nothing to do with the Pollok By-election. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh"] No, I wanted to know why there was such a long delay by the Minister in deciding whether or not there should be a container berth. Can she answer that question? Is it not absolutely scandalous that ii takes a by-election to get her Ministry to move?

Mrs. Castle

I really do not know what is the burden of the hon. Member's complaint—whether he thinks I have made the statement too soon or not soon enough. Both at Seaforth, where I discussed the potential development when I visited the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board recently, and on the Clyde, I have been pressed to let them know the position and to put an end to uncertainty. I have done this as soon as was compatible with the economic valuation of the various schemes we have had to undertake. It would not have been fair to other people, including those in Bristol who had to undergo this economic assessment, not to have carried out similar and highly scrupulous economic assessments in relation to Seaforth and Greenock.

Mr. Heller

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is not a by-election on Merseyside, but that we got a reply, which was very welcome, two days ago about the Gladstone Dock? This makes the arguments of hon. Members opposite completely irrelevant. Can she say how long it will be before we get a final reply about the financial assistance we shall require to build the extension of the Sea-forth Dock, in view of the fact that this is of vital importance not only to Mersey. side but for the whole economy of the country?

Mrs. Castle

It is true that the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board publicly thanked me for the speed with which I dealt with the Gladstone Dock application. At the same time, the members of the Board pressed on me the urgency of making as early a decision as possible about Seaforth, because they are anxious to go ahead. This is why, although there are some details still to be discussed—the exact numbers of container berths, and so on—I made the decision, so that the immediate work can start without delay. I do not want this country to lose out in the container berth race.

On the question of financial assistance, my hon. Friend will be aware that this scheme will qualify for the 20 per cent. investment grant.

Mr. Edward M. Taylor

Would not the right hon. Lady agree that it is a serious matter that this vital decision, which will not cost the Government anything, appears to have been held up, behind Southampton and Liverpool, as a by-election stunt? Will she either confirm or deny the rumour that the Government are considering appointing a Paymaster-General for Scotland?

Mrs. Castle

It is not a question of this decision having been held up. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] Of course it has not. In every case where proposals have been put to me—and, incidentally, the schemes which I am approving today are backed by the recommendations of the National Ports Council—I have tried to carry through the necessary economic assessments as quickly as possible.

I have done that because I am frightened that unless we take decisions quickly and get rid of a lot of the red tape this country will lose out in the port development race. That is what I am doing at Tilbury and Southampton—and, as soon as our economic studies were complete, that is what we have done at Seaforth and Greenock.

Mr. Wilkins

I hope that my right hon. Friend will not be deterred by the threat of the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Peter Walker) that he will try to unseat his hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, West (Mr. Robert Cooke) in order to have an election about Portbury, remembering that the last election in Bristol, North-West was fought on the same issue, and the Tories lost the seat.

Mrs. Castle

I have already, in answer to previous Question, dealt with the position of Portbury. I have told various hon. Members who represent Bristol constituencies that I am prepared to consider any alternative proposals which the Port of Bristol Authority may care to put to me, but I must do this in the context of the overall plan which we have been studying.

Mr. Ian Lloyd

As I was overlooking the Seaforth scheme only about three hours ago and talking with the Director-General of the Port Authority there, may I assure the right hon. Lady that her comments about that schemewill bewidely welcomed in Liverpool? But her explanation for the delay seems to suggest that there is now a two-tier apparatus of evaluation: first, the National Ports Council, and, secondly, her Ministry. Is she aware that what is now required is that the National Ports Council should be given authority to do this type of evaluation thoroughly and completely? Is she further aware—

Mr. Speaker

Order. Questions should be brief and elucidatory. We cannot have speeches at Question Time.

Mr. Lloyd

Is the right hon. Lady aware that this work should be done by the National Ports Council and that there should be no secondary delay on the part of her Ministry?

Mrs. Castle

I do not believe that that would be possible. After all, the final responsibility for approving an investment under the Harbours Act is mine. The Government are making substantial grants in these cases and the final responsibility could not be delegated to another body. However, I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are working closely on this and on all other schemes with the National Ports Council.

Mr. Small

Does my right hon. Friend recognise that many of us who have made a study of the container system recognise that time is not on our side, that our competitors abroad have been leapfrog-going over us, and that we are, therefore, grateful for the statement she has made?

Mrs. Castle

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for those comments. He is absolutely right. That is why I was so stimulated when I went the other day to Tilbury and saw how they are forging ahead; and I believe that they will be able to rival the Continental ports very soon indeed.

Mr. Henry Clark

Would the right hon. Lady assure us that her announcement was made before it appeared in the Glasgow evening newspapers?

Mr. Manuel

It was in this morning's newspapers, as the hon. Gentleman would know if he read them.

Mr. Clark

Is she aware that a large fund of "know-how" about container ports is available just across the Irish Sea from Glasgow, where the Port of Larne was developed to take containers 50 years ago by private enterprise?

Mrs. Castle

I assure the hon. Gentleman that no release of my statement was made by my Department or by any other Department.

Mr. Ogden

I urge my right hon. Friend not to be deterred by the dithering and suspicions of hon. Gentlemen opposite. Is she aware that her statement will be warmly welcomed by everyone in Glasgow and Merseyside, particularly Merseyside, and will she try to follow this speed of decision by taking a decision on the South Lancashire motorway?

Mrs. Castle

I have already dealt with that point in my preparation pool. My hon. Friend is right in commenting on the reactions of hon. Gentlemen opposite, for they are the reactions of guilty consciences. They know that, once again in this sphere, the Government have acted while they did nothing for the development of our ports. Our annual expenditure on ports, as a result of this and other types of action which we have taken, and are taking, has increased from an average of £18 million up to 1964 to £35 million last year, and it is expected to be £45 million in 1967.

Dame Irene Ward

Despite all this interchange about Southampton, Glasgow and Merseyside, is the right hon. Lady aware of the necessity to do something for Tyneside? Is this another instance of inaction, particularly having regard to the fact that 900 men have been dismissed on the Tyne this week? We want action on the Tyne!

Mrs. Castle

I am always ready to consider any proposals that are put to me.

Mr. Crawshaw

Would my right hon. Friend clarify one point in respect of the Merseyside project? When she says that she wants the authorities there to be able to go ahead on the groundwork, is she referring to the groundwork of the major scheme at Seaforth or merely the groundwork for the Gladstone Dock proposals, since that would be very much a short-term policy?

Mrs. Castle

I was referring to Sea-forth. I have been pressed by the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board not to waste a day, but to give it the all-clear; and so I have made my announcement today on this overall improvement. It means that the civil engineering work can be started at once—the kind of work that will be needed whatever is the ultimate outcome of the decision on the number of container berths and the grain terminal. They can start building quay walls and all sorts of things. They can get on with it, and I hope that they will.

Mr. Bessell

Is the right hon. Lady aware that her proposals and announcement will be received with widespread satisfaction everywhere? Is she aware that the development of the regions is largely dependent on container port facilities and will she, therefore, reconsider the scheme for Portbury and, in addition, consider schemes for Plymouth and Falmouth?

Mrs. Castle

I have already dealt several times this afternoon with the Port-bury question. What I have said about that applies to other ports. We are, of course, always prepared to consider, jointly with the National Ports Council, any specific proposals that are put to us. We are prepared to consider them, as 1 say, in the light of the overall strategy which we must have for port development in this country.

Mr. Dalyell

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, as one who has been tabling many Questions about containers, I congratulate her on the substance of her statement and on its timing? Would she say a little more about what she hopes to do for the East Coast of Scotland, bearing in mind how vital it is in our relations with the Common Market? May I, once again, welcome her announcement?

Mrs. Castle

I have already made reference to the developments at Grangemouth. On the first part of my hon. Friend's question, I know that the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board will be very grateful indeed for my timing.

Mr. Robert Cooke

Having made much of the financial considerations of these various rivals to Portbury, is the right hon. Lady aware that the City of Bristol is prepared to go ahead with Port-bury, tomorrow, using its own resources, if only she will give it permission to do so?

Mrs. Castle

I must repeat that I have invited the Port of Bristol Authority to put alternative proposals to me. I understand that that Authority is in the process of drawing up such proposals. I have not received them yet and, therefore, the hon. Gentleman is speaking rather out of turn.

Dr. Miller

Speaking as an elector of Pollok, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether she is aware that her decision will be extremely gratifying but that it will probably not influence in the slightest the way in which I shall vote at the by-election?

May I ask my right hon. Friend to believe that not only are the people of Scotland, of Clydeside particularly, happy about this, but that the business community—whom hon. Gentlemen opposite appear to have overlooked—is also delighted about the decision?

Mrs. Castle

It was pressed upon me, during my consideration of these proposals for Greenock, that it was vital to give Scotland and Scottish industry access to a port of its own, so that it would not be totally dependent upon Liverpool, where these massive developments are going on. I think that that is a reasonable point to bear in mind. Scottish industry has the right to the most modern and accessible means of transport and the Government are determined to do everything they can to stimulate the development of Scotland.

Mr. Stodart

As the right hon. Lady has set so much store by giving the green light as early as possible, why has she taken over a week to do it, as everything which she said this afternoon was reported in the Scottish Press a week ago?

Mrs. Castle

I am sorry, but I am not responsible for what appears in the Scottish Press. I repeat to the House—it is for hon. Gentlemen to judge, by their own standards—that the economic assessments of these two proposals have been pressed ahead as quickly as possible because we have been urged to do so by the Clyde Port Authority and by the Mersey Docks and Harbour Board.