§ 3. Mr. Chichester-Clarkasked the Minister of Public Building and Works whether he will now make a statement on his policy regarding the scope of Government intervention in the building and construction industry.
§ Mr. MellishI have no proposals for Government participation in the construction industry. Government influence on this industry is best exercised by the promotion of research and development, the dissemination of advice and information, but perhaps chiefly by the use of the rôle of the public sector as client, I am considering ways in which, by this means, the industry may be helped toward greater economy and efficiency of operation.
§ Mr. Chichester-ClarkWhile welcoming the Minister on his first appearance at the Dispatch Box since his elevation, may I ask him if he intends to intervene to recompense those on fixed price public contracts because of the loss they will sustain through the import of materials? Can the right hon. Gentleman give an estimate of what further increase is likely to take place in house prices as a result of devaluation?
§ Mr. MellishI thank the hon. Gentleman for his personal courtesy. To answer his question about those on fixed price contracts, no representations have yet been made to me by anyone in the industry. If representations are made to me, I shall be glad to meet and discuss the matter with those concerned. I believe that the future for the industry 4 both in the short-term and long-term is extremely good, and I very much hope that I can back the industry up in the future.
§ 21. Mr. Costainasked the Minister of Public Building and Works what steps he is taking to make the building and construction industry a greater source of employment.
§ Mr. MellishThe demand on the construction industry is expected to have increased by up to 5 per cent. in 1967 compared with 1966. I expect a further increase in 1968. To meet this, the industry must in the long term raise output per man rather than increase the size of its labour force.
§ Mr. CostainDoes not the Minister appreciate that the National Plan showed a possibility of a shortage of labour in the building industry even with a possible need to increase building labour by 2.7 per cent. between 1964 and 1967? Now we have had a decrease of nearly 4 per cent. over three years. How can the right hon. Gentleman explain that?
§ Mr. MellishI must ask the hon. Gentleman, who is a well known figure in the building industry, not to be so depressing. I have given him figures showing that activity was 5 per cent. up on last year, and the trends show that it should be bigger next year. One of the greatest worries is the question whether or not we shall have the manpower to do the job. I am having discussions with the industry to try to ensure an adequate supply of materials and the effective use of the available manpower.
§ Mr. RoebuckWill my right hon. Friend try to get the building industry to be a little more efficient? Is he aware that many builders believe that they are mechanised if they have a wheelbarrow? Can he do something to step up efficiency in the industry?
§ Mr. MellishMany sectors in the building industry are efficient. Some of the big firms are extremely efficient. The industry also comprises thousands of small men. I happen to be interested in their activities and want to help them. The big boys can look after themselves without help from me, but the small and medium men need help, and I shall try to get it for them.
§ Mr. Chichester-ClarkIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that the building industry has one of the highest rates of productivity of all industries? Will he tell us what will be the effect of the abrupt withdrawal of the S.E.T. premium in certain sections of the non-labour-intensive side of the industry?
§ Mr. MellishI appreciate the hon. Gentleman's point. Various representative bodies of the building industry are coming to see me, and I shall discuss these matters with them. Hon. Members on both sides of the House have talked about confidence in the building industry's future. Every year there has been an increase in output and total work load in the industry; yet we go on and on as if it were a disaster.