§ 10. Mr. Leslie Huckfieldasked the Secretary of State for the Environment whether he will make a statement on British Rail's application to him relating to the construction of an hotel over Gatwick station.
§ Mr. PeytonThis application would have involved an extension of the public sector. It was therefore unacceptable. It would also have meant further borrowing from the Exchequer.
§ Mr. HuckfieldI am sure that the whole House is very grateful for that even more novel illustration of the new Government's policy, or lack of it. Is not he aware that the British Railways Board is also under an obligation to make the maximum use of its existing economic resources? Is not it therefore detrimental to the finances of British Rail and the interests of the taxpayers as a whole that in this instance it is to be prevented from exercising the full use of its existing resources, and that a private firm will be deliberately allowed to go ahead instead?
§ Mr. PeytonI have no objection to a private firm taking risks with its own money. I have every objection to British Rail doing so if it is compelled for the purpose to borrow from the Exchequer.
§ Mr. Evelyn KingIs my right hon. Friend aware that in early January conditions at Gatwick Airport were so chaotic that there were queues for lavatories and food, that men and women were lying on the floor—
§ Mr. HuckfieldThat has nothing to do with the Question.
§ Mr. King—because there were queues for chairs, and that the manager was absent? In those circumstances, will my right hon. Friend view with suspicion any further applications for facilities for nationalised industries?
§ Mr. PeytonGreatly as I regret the terrible circumstances related by my hon. Friend, they have nothing to do with me.
§ Mr. BradleyIs the Minister's reply to the Question a preliminary to an announcement that he intends to hive off British Transport Hotels Ltd.?
§ Mr. PeytonI have not said so.