HC Deb 19 March 1968 vol 761 cc238-41
Q1 Mr. G. Campbell

asked the Prime Minister (1) if he will convene a conference on productivity to consider the effects on trade and industry of the Transport Bill;

(2) what representations he has received about the Transport Bill from trade and industry, local authorities and other public bodies, transport operators and export organisations; and what replies he has sent.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)

As to a special conference, no, Sir. As to representations, the greater part of those I have received have been of a uniform character by firms in the road transport industry. As such representations are properly matters for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport I have normally asked her to deal with them on my behalf.

Mr. Campbell

In the very serious situation in which the Government find themselves economically today, why does the Prime Minister not make a simple but effective contribution to help the Chancellor on Budget day either by dropping the whole Bill or the controversial parts of it?

The Prime Minister

I think that this matter has been and is being very fully debated in Committee. [HON. MEMBERS: "No. It has been guillotined."] Since the National Economic Development Council has estimated that at worst there will be an average increase of 0.2 per cent. on industrial costs—less than a halfpenny in the £ on prices to consumers—and since the Bill is designed to reduce the deficit on British Railways, which falls on the Exchequer, I hope that the hon. Gentleman, after full consideration, will feel able to support the Bill.

Mr. Manuel

Is the Prime Minister aware of the many communications received by hon. Members on this side in support of the Bill—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—regarding the provisions for rebate on fuel tax, the new bus grants, the rural bus grants, the reduction in drivers' hours and the retention of socially necessary lines? If hon. Members opposite are opposing these concessions they ought to make this clear when speaking at their meetings throughout the country.

The Prime Minister

Yes, I am aware of those representations. Of course, these will increase with growing understanding of the Bill and less dependence by certain sections of the public on propaganda dished out to them by right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite.

Mr. Grimond

Is the Prime Minister aware that in respect of some areas special considerations about certain sections of the Bill arise which are quite different from the general objection made by the road haulage industry? In areas such as the Highlands of Scotland, where transport is extremely important and freight rates are high, the extra charges under the Bill will be a disaster to the industry and to agriculture. Will the right hon. Gentleman look into these problems and see whether, to some extent, those services can be relieved from the higher charges under the Bill?

The Prime Minister

I know that this point has been substantially made. It is a matter for debate and I must leave it to my right hon. Friend, who is well aware of the problems.

Mr. Swain

I agree that the Transport Bill is a very good Bill, but may I ask my right hon. Friend whether, in the event of him changing his mind in future about a conference, he will invite the miners of this country to give the Government and industry a lesson on production, seeing that their production figures have gone up by 11 per cent. in six months?

Mr. Speaker

Order. Questions must be related to the original Question.

The Prime Minister

My hon. Friend will be aware that I recently met representatives of the Executive of the National Union of Mineworkers when these figures were quoted. Certainly if productivity in many other industries had risen anything like it has in the coal industry and other publicly-owned industries, my right hon. Friend would be facing a very different situation this afternoon.

Mr. Maudling

The Prime Minister referred to the growing understanding of the Transport Bill. Will he say what contribution is made to that growing understanding by curtailing Parliamentary discussion of it?

The Prime Minister

I thought that Parliamentary discussion on the proposal to curtail Parliamentary discussion was itself pretty full last week, and I do not think that I can add very much in answer to a question to the substantial arguments advanced by my right hon. Friend last week.

Mr. Thorpe

In fairness to the Prime Minister, may I ask whether he is aware that he is right to reject the idea of a conference for trade and industry, since they are already fully aware that nine-tenths of the Bill will have a disastrous effect on the economy? As the Government are apparently the only people left who are in ignorance of the economic disaster which the Bill will bring about, will the Prime Minister address himself to that question?

The Prime Minister

Since I accept neither of the two premises on which the last few words of the question are based, and since the Government have explained, and will continue to explain, the growing public appreciation of the benefits of the Bill, I do not think that I can accept what the right hon. Gentleman said.

Mr. Bob Brown

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Clause 152 of the Transport Bill embodies a Private Member's Bill which I moved to provide travel concessions for old people? Is he aware that the passing of this Clause will make available to thousands of old-age pensioners travel concessions of which they have been deprived for many years by the party opposite?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir. Many of the old-age pensioners are in my constituency, for which reason I repeatedly joined others of my hon. Friends when we were on the benches opposite in presenting a Bill to deal with this scandal, but every Friday, with great regularity, year after year it was blocked by the party opposite when it formed the Government, and my predecessor as Prime Minister specifically refused to introduce any Government Bill on this question.