Nationalisation (Hansard, 21 February 1968)

§ 26. Mr. Ridsdale
asked the Minister of Transport whether she will make a further statement on the nationalisation of the ports.

§ Mr. Swingler
There is no further statement to make yet.

§ Mr. Ridsdale
Is the Minister aware that taking over one undertaking alone would cost more than £100 million? How can he justify this on national grounds alone at the present time? Is he aware that we are beginning to think that the Minister is not considering the national interest, but is playing party politics?

§ Mr. Swingler
No, Sir, I am not aware of any of those things, but, as I have said before, I am aware that, in spite of widespread opposition to the public owner- 429 ship of the ports, most of the authorities of all kinds whom we have consulted wish to see the establishment of a national authority for the planning of the ports. We are not able to make a statement yet, because we are still consulting those authorities about the shape of the scheme.

§ Mr. McNamara
Can my hon. Friend say how soon we can expect this statement to be made? Many people in the ports, and hon. Members on this side of the House, are looking forward eagerly to the publication of the date of the nationalisation of the ports. Is my hon. Friend aware that the decision taken by the House last week was particularly welcomed in the Humber area?

§ Mr. Swingler
I am aware that many people wish to see the shape of the scheme as soon as possible, because they strongly support it. A statement will be made within the next two or three months. I am not able to say exactly when, but we do not want to prolong the uncertainty, and we will specify the nature of the proposals as soon as possible.

§ Mr. Peter Walker
Will the hon. Gentleman now confirm that the major user organisations, the Confederation of British Industry, and the Chamber of Shipping, have both categorically told the Government that they are strongly opposed to the nationalisation of the ports?

§ Mr. Swingler
The organisations named by the hon. Gentleman have made plain to us, and in public, that they are opposed in principle to public ownership anywhere. What I have said previously is that, in spite of that, those organisations and others agree with us that a central planning authority for the ports is urgently necessary, and therefore that changes are necessary in the structure of the industry. They agree with that, and we are proceeding on the basis of those views to make a scheme which is as widely acceptable as possible.

§ Mr. Heffer
Is it not clear to my hon. Friend that all the workers' organisations representing the workers in the ports are fully behind public ownership? Is it not also clear to my hon. Friend that for a long time we have had backward ports, which need modernising, and that this car only be done under public ownership?

§ Mr. Swingler
Yes, Sir. The trade unions have expressed to us the view that they are fully in favour of proceeding with public ownership.

§ Mr. Robert Cooke
When can the Port of Bristol, which is municipally owned, expect to receive the Government's blessing for its much needed improvement schemes?

§ Mr. Swingler
My right hon. Friend recently told the planning council that its schemes and proposals are still under consideration, and indeed under discussion with the Port of Bristol Authority. She will make a statement as soon as possible.

Mr. Alan Lee Williams
Will my hon Friend agree to set up a Committee of Inquiry into the Thames lighterage industry to see how this fits in with nationalisation proposals for the Port of London?

§ Mr. Swingler
As my hon. Friend knows, on his initiative we recently debated this matter in the House. My right hon. Friend is in consultation with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade about the possibility of an inquiry.