§ 5. Mr. Duffyasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what are the precise terms of reference he has given N. M. Rothschild, the merchant bankers, on inviting them to dispose of the major equity holding of the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation in Brown Bayley Steels, Sheffield.
§ Mr. John DaviesIn any disposal of my holding in Brown Bayley Steels, N. M. Rothschild and Sons will advise me in accordance with the terms of reference which I gave in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (Mr. Hordern) on 8th July.—[Vol. 820, c. 442.]
§ Mr. DuffyIs the right hon. Gentleman aware that shop-floor feeling in Sheffield steel is already tense as a result of current reorganisation and that the further invasion of the public sector may very well bring it to flashpoint? Will the terms of reference to Rothschild eventually include a stipulation that a similar purchase price will be made available to other shareholders and other interested parties, such as the British Steel Corporation, and that the Corporation shall not be prevented from showing an interest? Does not he think that consultation might usefully begin at this stage by bringing in the board of Brown Bayley as well as workers' representatives to assure them that as a result of any ultimate disposal there will be no closures or redundancies such as are now occurring in Sheffield?
§ Mr. DaviesI should stress that the advice of Messrs Rothschild to me is bascially on the financial aspects of the problem, not the industrial aspects. I shall be very much guided on the industrial problems by the advice given me by my Department and other interested parties, including the B.S.C. and private sector concerns. The hon. Gentleman may feel reassured that I shall take no action which does not seem to me industrially sensible.
§ 30. Sir G. Nabarroasked the Secretary of State far Trade and Industry whether he will seek Parliamentary approval for disposal of State-owned steel assets including Brown Bayley shares to be marketed by Rothschild's.
§ Mr. John DaviesNo, Sir, but where changes arising from my statement of 28th June result in such disposals the House will be informed.
§ Sir G. NabarroYes, but in that the House is not given an opportunity for debate. Will my right hon. Friend bear 9 in mind that when he used the very choice words "industrially sensible" a few moments ago, I endorsed what he said as regards all the bodies that he proposes to consult about the denationalisation of Brown Bayley and other similar undertakings? Will not it be possible for us to look at what my right hon. Friend is doing in the form of an affirmative Resolution presented to the House, so that we may criticise the process or the machinery for denationalisation, as is our democratic prerogative?
§ Mr. DaviesNo one will appreciate better than the hon. Gentleman—;
§ Sir G. NabarroThan "my hon. Friend".
§ Mr. Davies—than my hon. Friend—how delicate are these matters of commercial negotiation. It would not be expedient or to the advantage of the public interest that these matters should be debated until such time as they have been negotiated. Therefore, they will be reported to the House. My hon. Friend will have every opportunity of venting his spleen upon these matters. But it will be after they have been negotiated.
§ Mr. Michael FootApparently the right hon. Gentleman thinks that a reporting to the House is sufficient and that it is not necessary to have a Resolution. When the National Coal Board Bill went through the House, his Government agreed to the proposition that there should be a Resolution. Why will not he apply the same rules to the steel industry?
§ Mr. DaviesThe same rules will apply to the steel industry as apply to the coal industry—namely, where the matter of a disposal is in accord with the management of the corporation concerned and where that corporation itself undertakes the negotiation, there will be a reporting to the House. That is as true for the steel industry as it is for the coal industry.