HC Deb 11 May 1967 vol 746 cc1682-3
20. Mr. Peyton

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what benefits he expects to flow to industry from the estimate of a growth of production potential based on a range of figures with a difference of 1 per cent. a year between the higher and lower figures; and if he is satisfied in the light of experience that such a margin of error is sufficient.

The Joint Under-Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (Mr. Peter Shore)

The two figures would not so much represent a margin of error as the implications of alternative assumptions. Their value would be that they would help industry to form a view of what is possible, on which planning assumptions could be based. One per cent. is quoted in my right hon. Friend's paper for illustrative purposes.

Mr. Peyton

Does not the hon. Gentleman think that making these forecasts can be highly misleading and, therefore, very damaging to investment programmes? Does not he agree that the fiasco of the National Plan ought to have warned the Government against taking the arrogant path of claiming omniscience, which they do now?

Mr. Shore

No. The whole purpose of asking for alternative assumptions on which plans can be based is to ensure that errors are not repeated, or to ensure that different possibilities are fully taken account of by firms when they make their own plans.