§ 4. Mr. Strangasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the developments which have taken place at Upper Clyde Shipbuilders during the Parliamentary Recess.
§ 22. Mr. Douglasasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the total Government financial commitment involved in maintaining a shipbuilding capability on the Upper Clyde.
§ 37. Mr. Rankinasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made in securing a settlement of the dispute with Upper Clyde Shipbuilders; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. John DaviesI would refer hon. Members to the statement which I made on 20th October.—[Vol. 823, c. 724–36.]
§ Mr. StrangCan the right hon. Gentleman now confirm that he is giving the necessary guarantees for the completion of the ships at Govan Shipbuilders Ltd.? Furthermore, is he prepared to say that the Government are ready to go much further than they have done, although we welcome that has been done? Would he confirm that assistance will be available at Scotstoun and Clydebank over and above that available under the Local Employment Acts?
§ Mr. DaviesThere is a Written Question down today about the guarantees. Perhaps it would help the hon. Gentleman to know that I am fully prepared to give the guarantees in question, though there are certain purely formal issues to be resolved between Irish Shipping and the Government before that is done.
As to the question of assistance to any purchaser of the other yards and any embracing of the Scotstoun Yard within the Govan Shipbuilders project, I have made it clear that the Government are 1202 prepared to see these as eligible for assistance under the Local Employment Acts, and clearly I shall have to consider the proposals put forward with regard to what the Government can then do.
§ Mr. DouglasWould the Minister agree that he is departing, in the submission of these guarantees, from his view of the commercial viability of the shipyards, because, if he gives those guarantees at the current price these ships will actually have been put in at a loss? Would he confirm that he is not moving towards adhering to his objective, which was to seek means of preserving the employment in all four yards of U.C.S.? Unless be does so and gives a specific indication to this House that he is moving towards that objective, the co-operation of the workers will be hard to get.
§ Mr. DaviesI think the hon. Member would have some difficulty in quoting me precisely on the remark that I would continue to move towards employment in all four yards. I do not remember making such a statement. As for the previous part of his question, of course it will entirely depend upon Govan Shipbuilders being able in the event to put forward a proposal which commands respect in terms of its future viability. Clearly it would have been impracticable for them to do so if the work had stopped. Surely the hon. Member of all people should realise how serious the situation would have been if there had been no work available.