§ 33. Mr. Biffenasked the President of the Board of Trade what action he proposes to take on the recent report of the 1313 Monopolies Commission on cellulosic man-made fibres.
§ 39. Mr. Hordernasked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the report of the Monopolies Commission on the supply of man-made cellulosic fibre.
§ 42. Mr. Peytonasked the President of the Board of Trade if he has now arrived at a decision on the recommendations made by the Monopolies Commission in March, 1968, concerning Courtaulds' rayon interests.
§ 49. Mr. David Mitchellasked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now announce his decision on the report of the Monopolies Commission on the supply of man-made cellulosic fibres.
§ 96. Mr. Ronald Atkinsasked the President of the Board of Trade if he will reject the recommendations made by the Monopolies Commission in March, 1968, concerning Courtaulds' rayon interests.
§ Mr. CroslandAs I said in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Farnworth (Mr. Thornton) on 6th February, I expect to receive the Textile Council's Productivity and Efficiency Study in the course of this month. It would be wrong to take major policy decisions about the industry, including decisions on the Monopolies Commission's report on cellulosic fibres, until I have completed a thorough examination of the industry's structure in the light of the Textile Council's study,—[Vol. 777, c. 167–8.]
Mr. BittenBut is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is general mystification that Sir Frank Kearton has so abruptly and arbitrarily fallen from grace? Would he therefore bear in mind the necessity for the Board of Trade to express a clear view at the earliest possible moment on its policy on reorganisation in the textile industry and which horse it will back, Courtaulds or I.C.I.?
§ Mr. CroslandThe first part of the supplementary question is the most pure and mischievous nonsense. The Board of Trade is neither pro nor anti Courtaulds, I.C.I., Viyella or any other firm in the industry, as the hon. Gentle- 1314 man must know, and as Sir Frank Kearton knows perfectly well. In the study which we shall carry out we shall start from a position of neutrality.
§ Mr. PeytonDoes not the right hon. Gentleman accept that there is something odd about the Monopolies Commission's report being followed by such a deep and total silence on behalf of his Department lasting almost a year? I wish to say nothing unpleasant about Sir Frank Kearton, but he seems to have had a hypnotic and anaesthetising influence on the Department. Something should be said fairly soon.
§ Mr. CroslandThe relations between Sir Frank Kearton and my Department seem to bear two quite different interpretations by two hon. Members opposite. The reason why I have not taken the view expressed in the Monopolies Commission's Report and why I have waited for the Textile Council's study is perfectly simple. I do not propose to take any more piecemeal decisions about the future of this industry. In the past few years, far too many unthought-out and piecemeal decisions have been taken about it, and I do not propose to repeat that mistake.
§ Mr. BarnettAs the Textile Council reported as long ago as 1967 in its annual report that this study was being made, why is the Minister now expecting something different to come out of it, particularly bearing in mind that the members of the Committee which is doing the study are all active directors of companies which would be affected by such rationalisation?
§ Mr. CroslandMy hon. Friend is not correct. The membership of the Textile Council also includes trade union representatives and independent members, who are quite firm and independent enough to make their own independent views known if they happen to disagree with the owners.
§ Sir Frank PearsonWill the Minister give an undertaking that when he receives the study from the Textile Council the House will have an opportunity to debate it?
§ Mr. CroslandThe hon. Member knows that I can give no undertakings about debates, which are a matter for the Leader of the House. All I can do. 1315 which I now do, is to undertake that as soon as we can publish it we shall, so that the House can read it.
§ Mr. DalyellOn a point of order. In view of the Minister's reply to the hon. Member for Aberdeenshire, East (Mr. Wolrige-Gordon), on Question No. 32, and his reference to a later Question on Edinburgh Airport, Mr. Speaker, have you had a request from the Minister to answer Questions Nos. 45 and 46?
§ Mr. SpeakerThe point of Order might have been raised a little later, but I have had no such request.
§ Sir C. OsborneWill the Minister promise that at the earliest opportunity he will publish the Report, and will he say how soon that will be?
§ Mr. CroslandI have already said that I expect to receive it in a matter of days. I have not checked on how long publication will take, but as soon as I can publish it, I will do so.
§ Mr. Emrys HughesHas the Minister's attention been drawn to the fact that Courtaulds appear to be floating a large loan in Germany, and cannot something be done to persuade patriotic businessmen in Britain to put up money instead of going to Germany for it?
§ Mr. CroslandNo, Sir, I am not aware of the fact which my hon. Friend mentioned. The Chairman of Courtaulds is in my view an extremely patriotic industrialist who has done great services to the country.