PUBLICLY-OWNED INDUSTRIES

HC Deb 14 November 1968 vol 773 cc613-5

Q6. Mr. John Fraser

asked the Prime Minister whether he is satisfied with the co-ordination of those Departments of State which are concerned with the acquisition and management of publicly-owned industries and commercial assets; and if he will make a statement.

The Prime Minister

I would ask my hon. Friend to await the Government's reply to the recent Report by the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries.

Mr. Fraser

Does my right hon. Friend agree that public and social ownership is one of the finest ways of redistributing wealth? Will he see that the coordination which exists is used to extend this objective and that, where public money is put into private industry, it is matched by public shareholding and public administration?

The Prime Minister

Yes, Sir. This was a matter of much controversy—all forgotten now—a year ago on the Industrial Expansion Act in relation to investment in private industry. There is the important Report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries which we have been studying. The objectives set out in the Report are right, but there are many difficulties in fulfilling it on the lines proposed by the Committee. We hope soon to have the Government reply to it, which my hon. Friend will no doubt wish to study.

Mr. Crouch

Does the Prime Minister recall that there have been frequent complaints by the chairmen of the boards of nationalised industries that their recommendations have not been considered quickly enough by sponsoring Ministers because of the need for other Ministers, such as the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, to be consulted as well? Does he think this a good way to run a railway?

The Prime Minister

There are these occasional complaints. I myself have looked into one or two. But the hon. Gentleman will be aware that the nationalised industries ought not to be and would not seek to be separate sovereign states within this country. Their actions involve problems of demand management and public expenditure and the rest, and it is right that their demands, however natural from their point of view, should be carefully weighed against all the other competing demands on the national resources.

Mr. R. C. Mitchell

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied with the progress being made towards public ownership of the ports?

The Prime Minister

I have nothing to add on that important question to what I said during the debate on the Loyal Address in reply to the Gracious Speech.

Mr. Ridley

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, over all, the taxpayer has had a negative return on his investment in the nationalised industries? Would not he agree that any plans for the future should require the nationalised industries to be made more profitable before the British people have confidence in this form of industrial management?

The Prime Minister

With the dilapidated state of so many of these industries when they were taken over after the war, and certainly the arguably over-generous compensation paid at that time—and I take my share of responsibility for that—it was inevitable that there should have been some writing down of capital and, therefore, loss of the capital concerned. The hon. Gentleman, with his great knowledge of these industries, will have rejoiced in the tremendous achievements in productivity—in the coal industry, for example—of these industries, and will no doubt agree that, if private enterprise had the same record, we would not be facing the economic problems that we do face.

Mr. Cant

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that conclusions of a Report to which the Government members of a committee were converted by members of the Opposition must be suspect?

The Prime Minister

I am not sure whether my hon. Friend is talking about the Report of the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries. I and my predecessors have many times considered the suggestion of having one Minister responsible for all publicly-owned industries. It is attractive, particularly in relation to methods of working and efficiency. But there are problems, for example, in power or in transport involving whole questions of fuel or transport policy and the co-ordination of the public and private sectors, and these might lead to a great degree of overlapping rather than the securing of what the Select Committee may have had in mind.