HC Deb 27 June 1972 vol 839 cc1320-50

Again considered in Committee.

Question again proposed, That the Amendment be made.

Mr. Crouch

I shall not be diverted by interventions since I shall find myself out of order. I return immediately to the three Amendments.

The European Coal and Steel Community, which was established in 1951, has certainly not been a failure in the Six. Indeed, it has proved to be a great success. We are joining a successful part of the Community; namely, the ECSC. This is borne out by the figures. Coal production in the ECSC in 1970 was 170 million tons, but coal consumption in the Community was much more than that figure: it was over 200 million tons. There is already a significant gap between production and consumption. Therefore, need we be in such gloom at the prospect of reaching into a market which will mean our exporting coal to the enlarged Community? There is already an opportunity in the Six to take advantage of that higher consumption in terms of our coal supplies.

I am a firm believer in the British coal industry and have often spoken in Parliament about the retention of efficient coalfields and also about increasing our investment so as to make them still more efficient. I have always believed that there is a place for coal in our combined fuel economy in Britain and in the wider European market since coal is one of our major fuel factors. As we see changes in the oil situation in the next 10 or 20 years, I believe that coal will play, not a less important part but a significantly greater part in meeting future energy needs. The situation will not be greatly different, but I feel that the importance of coal will not be diminished. There is already a gap to be filled and this will result in demand for additional coal in the European countries with which we are about to join in partnership.

Since we have an opportunity to meet that demand by increasing the British production and by increasing our efficiency, this should be an incentive to our coal industry. Surely this is the sort of incentive and hope to which our miners should be looking forward. This is certainly the sort of hope that they deserve.

As we go into the Common Market everybody in industry is concerned with the answer to the question "How will it affect me?" Every individual wants to know whether his industry will expand or decrease in size. My opinion is that the coal industry will have a great opportunity to increase in size and will be able to make greater exports in enlarged markets.

The situation in the steel industry is a little different. The British Steel Corporation faces the problem of joining the ECSC in the knowledge that our industry will be about 20 per cent. of the size of the combined steel production of the ECSC. We also know that we are going in with a much modernised British Steel Corporation, with still more modernisation to be achieved. We go in with a strong industry and a big opportunity. I do not see why we should feel gloomy about the prospects. As my hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley) commented, he believes that the pressures of competition on the British Steel Corporation will be beneficial. That is certainly my view. Lord Melchett, the chairman of this nationalised industry, has expressed his own confidence. I hope that the confidence expressed by the chairman, and the confidence that I and my colleagues are expressing tonight about the opportunity of the British Steel Corporation further to expand and to take the opportunity of selling in a wider market, will be passed on through the whole of the management structure of the steel industry down to those working in the steel mills.

Mr. Raymond Fletcher (Ilkeston)

The hon. Gentleman will realise that what many of us really fear is that management in steel, which is good management on the whole—Lord Melchett has done a reasonably good job—is already remote from the plants which are managed. When we join the European Coal and Steel Community it will be even more remote from the plants which are managed. Siting and planning considerations will be more concerned with Europe than with the social problems of the workers here. This real fear is exemplified by the fact that 1,500 jobs in my constituency have recently been placed under sentence of death.

Mr. Crouch

I would accept that intervention as a valuable contribution to our general thinking about what will happen to the steel industry when we go into the Common Market. The hon. Gentleman referred essentially to management problems in the industry. If there is a management weakness it will have to be tackled not by us in the House of Commons but by the British Steel Corporation.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned something else which other hon. Members have already referred to and which no one in the House can ignore; that is, that we are talking not only about economic opportunity but also about opportunities for jobs and for continuing work in the industry. I respect this absolutely. It is the job of management to ensure that we become more efficient, bearing in mind our social obligations to those whom we employ today but who, because of increasing efficiency, may have to be made redundant, as some have already become redundant. These are the problems of management, and they are the problems which the management of the National Coal Board and the National Union of Mineworkers have managed to face up to and resolve—not perfectly, as I am the first to acknowledge, but nevertheless management problems have been tackled.

I do not think that by joining the Community we should think for one moment that the management of the British steel industry will be transferred to Luxembourg, Strasbourg or Brussels. That is a complete misunderstanding of the position of Member States in the Community. The only difference in position in which we shall find ourselves in the ECSC is that some modification to the position of the Minister, the Secretary of State in this country, has to be made. That is what the Amendment suggests should not be done. The modifications suggested in the three Amendments would allow the Secretary of State to retain powers which I personally think he should retain.

I was never happy about the possibility of interference from the Secretary of State in the proper management and running of the industry. Here I agree with the hon. Member for Ebbw Vale (Mr. Michael Foot), who expressed concern about the intervention of the Secretary of State over steel prices. I understood the reason for that intervention, though I never liked it. I prefer to see the chairman of a nationalised industry given the freedom to manage his industry without interference. However, such interference has been modified and has been taken away in the Bill. That is why I am strongly opposed to the suggestion in the three Amendments that it should be returned.

Mr. Barry Jones (Flint, East)

The hon. Member for Canterbury (Mr. Crouch) made a sincere, provocative, unconvincing and serpentine speech.

I do not think that anyone disputes that the steel industry is the very foundation of our national economic activity. I find it very disturbing that the British Steel Corporation appears to be making a run for Europe in order to secure its independence in price levels and to slip the lead of the DTI. Equally daunting is the sight of our Government placing constraints upon the growth potential of the country's basic industry to pay, in part at least, the price of entry into the Community.

Whatever the outcome of these stealthy activities, the fact seems to be that the British Steel Corporation in Wales undoubtedly is the largest and best employer of labour that one can imagine. As many as 33 per cent. of the working population in Wales are employed by the corporation.

There is no doubt in my mind that the economies of North and South Wales are bound inextricably to the fortunes of the steel industry, and I hope that hon. Members will take it from me that there is a very substantial steel industry in North Wales. It employs 16,000 people, 13,000 of whom work at the large steel works at Shotton in East Flintshire, though what might be described as a sword of Damocles hangs over the North Wales steel industry and there is a growing body of opinion which believes that the Government bartered away some of our steel greatness to pay the price of entry to the EEC.

I do not take any pleasure in re-reading my speeches, but I recollect that in our October debate on the Common Market I asked the Minister whether any plan existed which postulated a rather high rate of redundancy in the steel industry in the decade ahead. I asked him to nail the lies and rumours concerning the development of the industry. Today, eight months later, we see a likely production ceiling of only 28 million tons, and we have seen already the callous plans for closing Irlam and rendering nearly 8,000 Scottish steel men unemployed. There is little wonder that the 7,000 men who work the 12 open-hearth furnaces in the Shotton steel works in my constituency have baffled feelings and heavy hearts.

It appears that we are to make a triumphant entry into Europe and then the finest steel men in Britain join the dole queues. Hon. Members should take every opportunity to say to the Government that it is not only the computers, the accountants and the slide-rule which should decide what happens in the British steel industry. We ought to have a great deal of concern for the social implications and the regional, sub-regional and even national complications if and when large numbers of men previously employed at open-hearth furnaces are left without jobs because of the findings of computers and slide-rule accountants in high-powered city offices. I hope therefore that the Government can give some telling assurances to the steel workers in Wales, particularly at Shotton.

10.15 p.m.

When I first mentioned my worries about the future of Shotton I found a great deal of support regionally. My hon. Friends from Merseyside came out with a ringing and stirring declaration of support for the need for further investment at Shotton. They particularly pinpointed the need for the building of a deep water dock on the Birkenhead side of the River Mersey. That would not only mean that Shotton would become much more commercial and profitable but would provide employment for many people in Birkenhead and Liverpool. I was also pleased to find that many hon. Members on the Government side declared their willingness to indicate in the right quarters their feeling, no matter what part of North Wales they represented, that Shotton should have substantial investment soon. Hon. Members opposite from Cheshire and that area also gave support.

No one would deny that there is a crisis point on Deeside and that if these open-hearth furnaces were replaced, disaster would hit not only Flintshire and Denbighshire but also parts of Cheshire and a great deal of Merseyside. Some have gone so far as to say that the whole economic infrastructure from Caernarvonshire to Chester could be seriously undermined if the Government were foolish enough not to allow Shotton to have the £50 million investment programme which has been submitted to them.

The Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Peter Emery)

I welcome this debate because it allows the Government to ensure that those who work in the coal and steel industries understand that it is the Government's firm and definite view that our entry into the EEC will provide advantages and maximise opportunities for both industries. Let us therefore start on that understanding.

Our coal and steel industries are well placed to meet the challenge of entry. We shall be the largest coal producer in the Community and the BSC will become the Community's principal steel producer. We shall be able to play a leading rôle in the development of the European Coal and Steel Community. Surely that is what hon. Members opposite want. It is certainly what I believe all people in these industries would like—both workers and management. This is the first debate that we have been able to have on this matter. This question is the opportunity which will be provided for these industries by our entry.

The hon. Member for Penistone (Mr. John Mendelson) asked me a number of questions. He asked whether the tempo of redundancies in steel would increase under the pressure of Government. The answer is a categorical "No". It is absolutely untrue to suggest that a redundancy programme has been increased because of governmental pressure. In the same way, the hon. Gentleman asked whether there had been consultation about the size of the steel industry with the Higher Authority, with the EEC or with the European Coal and Steel Community. Let me again give him the sort of categorical answer for which his speech asked. There have been no exchanges of documents, written statements or correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and the European Coal and Steel Community or the member States concerning the future development of the United Kingdom's steel industry. In other words, the assurance that the hon. Gentleman wants—

Mr. Peter Hardy (Rother Valley)

Not discussed at all?

Mr. Emery

I am saying that nothing has been hidden. There is nothing that has been done under the counter, nothing that has not been disclosed. Therefore, the whole of the position about the future of the British steel industry has not been discussed with the European Coal and Steel Community.

Mr. Eric S. Heffer (Liverpool, Walton)

That makes it even worse. Hon. Gentlemen on the Government benches are a bunch of idiots.

Mr. Hardy

The Minister is able to give a categorical assurance that there is reason for optimism. At the same time he says that that is justified because there have been no talks. Can he say that there have been no talks? If he does say that, does he believe that the Committee would believe an optimistic forecast?

Mr. Emery

Let us get the question clear. The Opposition have asked whether anything has been hidden, whether there is anything that has been done behind the scenes, or whether any controls which exist in the Community will limit the expansion of this industry. I am able to say to the Opposition that there have been no discussions on this matter. There has been no way in which limitation is possible. The British industry will be as free as it ever was to expand. It will be in the position as stated by my hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr.Ridley). The industry will rely upon what it is able to sell. Those are the assurances for which the Opposition have asked and it is important that they should be given.

The hon. Member for Penistone also raised a point about the Dutch coal industry. Negotiations are taking place at present about the re-adaptation treaties, which are the ways by which the industry and those working in it will be able to obtain benefits out of our subscription to the Community. In the regional areas, and, indeed, in any policies on both social matters and the movement of labour, and any redundancy questions, this is one of the ways in which we shall be able to benefit from our entry into the Community.

The hon. Member for Penistone also asked about the 13 per cent. rule. In a document published in the Community's official Journal on 30th January, 1970, entitled "The Broad Outline of Competition Policy in the Structure of the Steel Industry", the Commission set out its views on competition within the concentrations of the ECSC steel industry. The Commission estimated that the number of ECSC enterprises providing 90 per cent. of the Community crude steel production should be fewer than about 10 and that there should be a change in the industry's structure towards a situation where the largest had 12 or 13 per cent. of the Community's steel production.

That is exactly the factor to which the hon. Gentleman referred. The Commission drew the attention of the European steel producers to that fact. This is an opinion of the High Authority but it is in no way binding.

The hon. Gentleman asked whether this put any limitation on the target set by the joint steering group. The answer to that, again, is "No". The Joint Steering Group, which comprised both the BSC and Government working together, did not consider that this had anything to do with the expansion that we were able to see for the British steel industry.

Mr. Eadie

rose—

Mr. Emery

I want to answer the hon. Gentleman's speech first and then I will answer any questions that are left.

Mr. Eadie

This is an important point.

Mr. Emery

If I give way I shall not be able to answer the hon. Gentleman's speech.

Mr. Eadie

This is an important point. It concerns the Government and the British Steel Corporation and the question of the joint steering committee. Will the Under-Secretary confess that the BSC and the joint steering committee had never seen the McKinsey Report, so how could they have known what the global output should be?

Mr. Emery

The McKinsey Report was not received until after the joint steering group had reported. The report was made available immediately to the BSC, so there is no question of anything being hidden. I thought that had been quite clearly stated to the House.

My hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury pointed out one of the major factors which is not considered often enough in this House when regional arguments about the placement of steel works are being considered. What we manufacture we must sell. The sales of manufactured iron and steel products will be a major determining factor in the size of the industry. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the rôle he has always played in the protection of consumers' interest in connection with the consumers' council.

Mr. Arthur Lewis

What a load of rubbish.

Mr. Emery

I think that the hon. Member for Midlothian said that if we joined the EEC there would be consumers' councils. But the consumers' councils for the electricity and gas industries will remain exactly as they are. The domestic consumers' council for the coal industry will be retained and will still be able to be financed by the Government.

It was suggested by a number of hon. Members, including the hon. Member for Midlothian, that the whole concept of the Treaty of Paris was unacceptable. But the Labour Government made it absolutely clear that they accepted the Treaty of Paris without reservation, and that is what we are debating today. It is only through the Treaty of Paris that we have the European Coal and Steel Community. At the time, however, the Labour Government made not the slightest criticism of it. I am worried that the criticism today is being levelled by people who do not want us to join the Common Market. They are using the argument to ensure that we do not enter Europe in any guise whatever. That point needs to be brought out.

The hon. Member for Midlothian asked me about the capital reconstruction of the coal industry. I can give him a categorical answer that we shall be able to carry out the capital reconstruction that we wish, and there is no way in which the Treaty of Paris can really affect that.

The hon. Gentleman then argued the problem of the steel industry in Scotland, which I can understand. On 20th June the Corporation announced the prospect—and it was only the prospect—of the loss of 6,500 to 7,500 job opportunities in Scotland over the next five years as a result of the need to close down out-dated open-hearth steelmaking plant. The Corporation believed it right in any discussions it was having in Scotland to set out the future of the Scottish industry. There is nothing new in the fact that open-hearth plant is out-dated. There is nothing new in the fact that the steel industry must modernise and rationalise to be able to compete in the rest of the world. One of the main arguments for nationalisation was that it would allow rationalisation to be brought about more simply and easily. The hon. Gentleman cannot complain when he sees it coming about.

Mr. Gregor Mackenzie

The hon. Gentleman has harangued us for long enough about the insensitive announcement by the Corporation last week. He must bear in mind that the Corporation came to us just a couple of days before we discovered we had the highest June unemployment figures for many years in Scotland. He must take those two things together before making further comments.

Mr. Emery

Of course the unemployment figures are of the greatest concern, but I hope that the fall in the United Kingdom unemployment level is of pleasure to both sides of the Committee.

The hon. Gentleman must realise that his party made the nationalised steel corporation an independently-managed body. It has a right in discussions to set out, without consultation with the Government, what it thinks is the likely position of the most redundant plant within any area. I am not trying to shrink from what was put fairly and openly to people in proper consultation.

It is important to remember the other side of the coin in Scotland. A record £265 million investment programme has been approved for 1972–73, some three times the programme which existed in 1968 and 1969. These are the facts which are often forgotten when we are considering the way in which rationalisation and modernisation will be brought to the Scottish industry. On the stocks is £60 million of new investment at Ravenscraig. As a result, Scottish steelmaking will increase in total. In addition, £26 million is earmarked for the deep-water terminal at Hunterston.

The hon. Member for Midlothian urged me to make an announcement tonight about a green field site at Hunterston. He is only taunting me. He knows that that is impossible. He must bear in mind that a number of other Opposition hon. Members would like the green field site to be not at Hunterston put perhaps at Port Talbot, or perhaps in Flintshire. These are problems the Corporation is trying to solve. It is trying to work out what type of investment there shall be and how it shall be brought about in order to achieve the future production capacity of the industry as a whole.

Mr. Jay

rose—

Mr. Emery

I have given way a great deal, and I have only five minutes left.

Lord Melchett welcomes our entry into the Community. He looks forward to the dynamic effect that it will have on the industry's customers and on its own production. The private sector of the industry holds similar views.

Turning to the coal situation, we have seen a recovery since the coal strike, demonstrating the resilience of our coal industry. Productivity is now higher than a year ago and stocks are above the level of last year. There is no reason to expect that membership of the Community will in any way be detrimental to our industry. On the contrary, the opportunities for greater trade in coal in Europe within the competitive framework set by the Community should benefit the industry particularly.

In 1971 when Community coal was free to enter the United Kingdom less than a quarter of a million tons was imported. In the same year we exported nearly 2½ million tons to the Community. The Community is currently importing about 25 million tons of coal—

Mr. Heffer

Answer the debate instead of reading.

Mr. Emery

The hon. Gentleman has not been paying attention.

Mr. Heffer

I have listened to you for long enough.

Mr. Emery

There were direct questions put to me on the import and export of coal. The hon. Member may not have put them to me but others are interested in these matters. The Community is currently importing 25 million tons of coal, and there is a great opportunity for the NCB to win some of that market. We shall also remain free to decide on our own policy towards any importation from third countries, a point raised by the hon. Member for Midlothian. That power will still remain with the Government.

The legislative changes required in the Bill are purely and simply to deal with the Consultative Council situation. As a member of the European Coal and Steel Community, the United Kingdom will be represented on the European Coal and Steel Community Consultative Committee by producers, workers, consumers and dealers, not just, as was suggested, by producers alone. The representation of steel consumer interests on the existing Consultative Committee includes stockholders, plant manufacturers, mechanical and electrical engineering, the motor car industry and general users. This Committee is consulted before important decisions are taken by the Commission, and our representatives will be able to ensure that proper account is taken of our interests, including those specifically of the consumer.

I come to the query of the hon. Member for Flint, East (Mr. Barry Jones) about Shotton. I cannot say anything further than what was said in the debate on 23rd May. I know of the hon. Gentleman's concern and the concern in his area over possible job losses at the Shotton works. He has led a deputation to my hon. Friend the Minister for Industry, and he has brought his town clerk to see me. There have been a fair number of representations made on these matters. I emphasise that the question of further investment at Shotton is primarily for the Corporation to decide. The Corporation must assess the possibilities in the context of its overall capacity requirements. When this report is made the Government will consider both the regional and social factors which are involved in this plan.

Of course these factors are essential. It would be wrong for anyone to go away with the thought that the Government are not as concerned as anyone about those repercussions. The Government wish to ensure a strong industry in coal and steel, and the Government believe that a unique opportunity is being provided by our entry to the Common Market. It is for that reason that I urge the Committee to resist these Amendments, which have been a "hang-up" for this debate.

Mr. Michael Foot

I will do my best to answer directly the case which has just been put to the House. The Under-secretary claims that there are good prospects for the coal and steel industries in Europe, that we need have no fears from the powers which the High Authority is to possess and that all the alarms and anxieties which have been expressed can be easily disposed of. The hon. Gentleman went so far as to say, in what was an extraordinary statement, that there have been no discussions with the High Authority about the future of the industry.

I hope to go into all these matters in turn. In our opinion, the future of the coal and steel industries within the European Economic Communities should have been dealt with in separate Bills. We have always held the view that that should be the case. Many hon. Members on this side of the Committee, particularly my hon. Friends who represent coal mining and steel constituencies, have spent a large part of their political lives fighting for the proposition that these great industries should be made answerable to the elected House of Commons. Now we see that the considerable powers over these industries are to be transferred elsewhere to quite irresponsible bodies. Furthermore, the offence is made the deeper by the attempt which the Government have made throughout all these discussions to conceal these factors from us and to blur the realities of the situation.

I will come to some of the facts of the matter which are bound to affect the livelihood of people within the coal and steel industries. That is not saying that, if by any mischance the Bill is to go through and the Government timetable is fulfilled, those of us who have to face the situation, who represent coal or steel constituencies will not do everything in our power to ensure that our industries are successful. We will do that in the interests of our constituents and the country. But that does not alter the fact that we believe the Government and the Minister today have further offended against the facts of the situation by attempting to blur the realities, as in the case of the rest of the Bill, to such a great degree. Our charge is that it blurs the responsibilities which are raised in different institutions.

I shall give some illustrations. First, there is the question of capital reconstruction. The Minister claims that there is no problem about capital structure and capital reconstruction in either the steel or coal industries. It is claimed that entry into the Community does not impair that in any way. That is not what anyone would deduce from reading Article 134 of the Treaty of Accession. I will not read it all through now, but anyone who reads that Article will see that the whole point of having that Article in the Treaty is that it imposes certain restrictions when we are under the High Authority. The point of being under the High Authority is that it should exercise certain high powers under the Treaty of Accession which we have signed.

The matter is further elaborated in Chapter 7 of the Treaty of Paris, which deals with interference with conditions of competition. The rules of competition are laid down which the High Authority is to exert and which it is given powers to exercise. That is the whole point of the operation. Therefore, the rules of competition will be laid down by the High Authority in Europe rather than this Parliament.

The hon. Gentleman argues that it does not make any difference to any matters of great importance. Nothing could be of greater importance to the steel industry, although it applies even more to the coal industry as a result of the recent strike. It is a question of whether capital reconstructions can be carried through or whether the High Authority will have anything to say about them. The hon. Gentleman may say that this is all clear and that there is no difficulty. That is not the view of one of his predecessors in office—I am not quoting the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley), I am quoting his "bowling alley" companion, as we used to call him in those days, the present Minister of Posts and Telecommunications—when he argued that it was just as well to spend money on bowling alleys as steel works. The Under-Secretary seemed to be advocating that same policy today.

The hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen), when we were debating the last major essential capital reconstruction of the steel industry, put to the hon. Gentleman's companion, the present Minister for Posts and Telecommunications: My hon. Friend says that the sum could not be used for writing off after 1972–73. Is this because he is advised that under the Treaty of Paris such writing off would be deemed to be subsidised competition? The answer by the then Minister for Industry was: It is because the corporation itself will be contributing to the reserve, hopefully, from its own retained earnings which it will use for these other purposes. Naturally, as my hon. Friend points out, the new environment in the European Coal and Steel Community, into which the corporation will be entering, undoubtedly has a very marked bearing on the extent to which it will be possible for the corporation even to appear to be subsidising its operations. So it will have to perform in a normal commercial manner in this respect, as in all others."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 16th December, 1971; Vol. 828, c. 868.]

[Sir ROBERT GRANT-FERRIS in the Chair]

10.45 p.m.

That is a very clear reply from the hon. Gentleman's predecessor indicating that the Government would not have been able to carry out the capital reconstruction that they carried out in the steel industry if we were already in the Community.

I know that we have had a precedent. The right hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Mr. Powell) referred to the extraordinary precedent of the Government being in breach of the only agreement into which they have entered with the Common Market about the margin on floating exchanges. We have also had the extraordinary state of affairs of the Government saying, "Although we are eager to enter the monetary and economic union, we shall try to float the pound in the meantime." It is rather like a man saying that he has made up his mind to enter a monastery in order to reform his morals, but insists in the meantime on having several nights out in Soho. That is the way the Government operate their monetary policy.

Now the same policy is apparently to be applied to the steel industry. The Government say "We do not have to abide by it." The rules are laid down. These gentlemen in Europe have taken the trouble to lay down, first, in the Treaty of Paris and then in the Article which we had to sign in the Treaty of Accession, that we had to give all the information about these matters to the then Minister for Industry which were recited to the House. Now we are told "It does not matter. We need not take any notice of all these documents. Nobody will say that they apply." I am doubtful whether that will necessarily be so.

We should have had a much clearer statement about capital reconstruction and whether the statement made by the then Minister for Industry was correct. If the statement made by the Undersecretary today is correct, he is in effect tearing up that section of the Treaty of Accession and the previous part of the Treaty of Paris.

Let as take, for example, the question of prices. Once again the question about the powers over prices is blurred. The Under-Secretary argues that going into the European Economic Community does not make any difference. So little difference, he did not have to discuss the matter. I should have thought that pricing policy was important. We all know why Lord Melchett wants to go in. He wants to escape from the attentions of the Government. I can understand that, although it is not an adequate excuse. The noble Lord wants to go in to escape altogether from the Government's surveillance of his prices. Of course he does. That is the main reason why he wants entry.

When the new Minister for Industry is asked about it, he does not give the answer as categorically as that. Yesterday, the Minister for Industry was asked by the hon. Member for Oswestry: If the Government were unwise enough to move towards a system of price freeze or control, would my hon. Friend have authority under the Treaty of Paris to require compliance by the British Steel Corporation? The Minister replied: The price structure is for the industry to assess. Steel is operating in an internationally competitive market, and the intention of the BSC and the Government is that it should be profitable. On the role of intervention, my hon. Friend will be aware that the powers of direction which followed representation from the Consumer Council are being repealed by the European Communities Bill."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 26th June, 1972: Vol. 839; c. 986.] That was a perfectly correct reply. There is a great difference in the way that the steel industry will work; the Government will not have the power over prices which they have enjoyed so far—for example, in carrying through the great achievement by the Prime Minister, who boasted that he had intervened to cut the steel price increase from 14 to 7 per cent. The Government will not have the power to try to maintain the system of pricing we have had in the steel industry, which, on the whole, benefits our more distant regions. Instead, we shall have to adopt the system laid down in Europe.

Yet the Under-Secretary of State says that the Government do not have to have discussions with the Community and the Commission, whether it is desirable or not. He is not even well-informed about what the Government are doing. Perhaps the Government themselves do not know what the Brussels Commission is doing. I gave the hon. Gentleman plenty of opportunity. He could have obtained information by this time from the Department. I even asked the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury to tell us what he knew about the discussions which the Commission is having on these matters.

Here then, we have, in the Under-secretary of State, a member of the Government telling us that we need not worry and that nothing of any importance is happening. Yet the document "Europe" tells us that the Commission is: … proceeding to a detailed examination of the situation of the coal and steel industries in the United Kingdom…". It is dated 24th and 25th April, 1972—not some date in 1967 or 1962, when some previous application was being made, but here and now. A question was asked of the Commission on the subject and it replied: In the framework of the UK/EEC Council of Association, the High Authority and the Commission have been informed regularly on the evolution of the economic and social evolution of the coal and steel industries in the United Kingdom. The hon. Gentleman was telling us a few minutes ago that there had been no consultation. According to the Commission, however, it has been regularly informed. Perhaps the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster can help us out. We know that he has not taken much interest in the subject but perhaps be can pick it up, because, after all, he is supposed to have negotiated all this. But it seems that he does not even know what has occurred.

Mr. Rippon

The position is exactly as stated in the 1971 White Paper. The position as far as the document and exchanges are concerned is exactly as set out by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State. All sorts of things come out in the Commission; it does all sorts of research of its own. We have had no formal exchanges. What is clear is that the Community confirmed that it would not challenge the size or the legal status of the British steel industry.

Mr. Foot

I will come back to the "all sorts of things going on," because we have a right to know what is going on. The right hon. and learned Gentleman has tried to distract attention by his intervention from what is going on. We have never got an answer to the question of the 42 million tons. I have asked him whether he got an agreement from those he negotiated with for the steel industry's proposed extension of its programme of 40 to 42 million tons. He cannot say, apparently, because they may never even have been asked. All we know is that all sorts of things go on in the Commission.

I have read one paragraph and now I will read another in order to put this into context. This is the answer given by the Commission: In the framework of the UK/EEC Council of Association, the High Authority and the Commission have been informed regularly of the economic and social evolution of the coal and steel industries in the United Kingdom. That is what I read and it goes on: This situation is at present"— that is April, 1972— is at present, the object of a detailed examination, in view of the accession of Great Britain to the European Communities, in order to prepare in good time the application of the ECSC Treaty to these industries. If the Brussels Commission, on its own statement, is carrying out a detailed investigation of what is happening in our industries, first of all the House of Commons should have been told about it before the Bill and, secondly, the Minister in charge should know about it, instead of sitting there and trying to mis- lead the Committee as he did a few minutes ago.

This is an illustration of the way these great industries have been dealt with in these negotiations by the right hon. and learned Gentleman, ever since he has been in charge.

Mr. Rippon

The position is exactly as I have stated and is not as stated in Europe News.

Mr. Foot

One of the purposes of parliamentary debate, as I have said on many occasions, is that when Ministers may seem to be guilty of the kind of attempt to mislead the Committee which the right hon. and learned Gentleman tried in the last few minutes, then we have an opportunity of seeing who is correct at Report stage. This is a Bill which affects the future of great industries, of industries in which many of us have constituents working.

We do not trust the word of the right hon. and learned Gentleman. We do not trust the way in which he conducted the negotiations for these great industries, in a most slipshod manner, and now, when we come to the single period of two hours left to us under this guillotine to discuss the future of these industries, he comes to us, incompetently briefed, and does not even know what is going on in Brussels.

The right hon. and learned Gentleman is not fit to be in charge of a Bill of this nature. He has behaved with consistent flippancy and has shown that he has relied solely on the guillotine and the fact that he has no Report stage in which he can be held to account. On those grounds alone, the Committee should fight this Bill.

We intend to have all these facts brought out; all these facts which they have been concealing so long in all these industries and I say to the right hon. and learned Gentleman who got up in the hope of relieving some of our anxieties, that the more the House of Commons connives at the blurring of responsibility for the future of these industries, the more they will add to the antagonism in the country about them, particularly at a time, as they should know, when the right hon. and learned Gentleman is pressing that there should be no expansion in the British steel industry. That is what 28 million tons mean. They do not seem to know it.

We were always promised that if some parts of the steel industry were to be run down, there would be investment on the scale of £3,000 million to £4,000 million over the next 10 years to ensure that other sections of industry would be built up. It is this which has necessitated the figure being kept down to 28 million tons. It becomes worse when the Government are trying to transfer authority for dealing with these industries away from the House of Commons where it belongs into the hands of irresponsible bodies in Europe. Indeed, the corporation which

many of us have fought to ensure shall be answerable to the House of Commons will become an irresponsible monster which nobody can get at, accountable to no one. This is the situation which the Government are—

It being Eleven o'clock The CHAIRMAN proceeded, pursuant to Order [2nd May], to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.

Question put, that the Amendment be made: —

The Committee divided: Ayes 260, Noes 270.

Division No. 249.] AYES [11.0 p.m.
Abse, Leo Eadie, Alex Kelley, Richard
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.) Edelman, Maurice Kerr, Russell
Archer, Peter (Rowley Regis) Edwards, Robert (Bilston) Kinnock, Neil
Armstrong, Ernest Edwards, William (Merioneth) Lambie, David
Ashley, Jack Ellis, Tom Lamborn, Harry
Ashton, Joe English, Michael Lamond, James
Atkinson, Norman Evans, Fred Latham, Arthur
Bagier, Gordon A. T. Ewing, Henry Leadbitter, Ted
Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) Faulds, Andrew Lee, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Barnett, Joel (Heywood and Royton) Fell, Anthony Leonard, Dick
Batter, William Fisher,Mrs. Doris (B'ham,Ladywood) Lever, Rt. Hn. Harold
Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood Fitch, Alan (Wigan) Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.)
Bennett, James (Glasgow, Bridgeton) Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) Lewis, Ron (Carlisle)
Bidwell, Sydney Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) Lomas, Kenneth
Biffen, John Foley, Maurice Loughlin, Charles
Bishop, E. S. Foot, Michael Lyon, Alexander W. (York)
Blenkinsop, Arthur Ford, Ben Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.)
Boardman, H. (Leigh) Forrester, John Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson
Body, Richard Fraser, John (Norwood) McBride, Neil
Booth, Albert Freeson, Reginald McCartney, Hugh
Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur Garrett, W. E. McElhone, Frank
Boyden, James (Bishop Auckland) Gilbert, Dr. John McGuire, Michael
Bradley, Tom Ginsburg, David (Dewsbury) Mackenzie, Gregor
Brown, Bob (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne,W.) Golding, John Mackie, John
Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan) Gourlay, Harry Mackintosh, John P.
Brown, Ronald (Shoreditch & F'bury) Grant, George (Morpeth) Maclennan, Robert
Buchan, Norman Grant, John D. (Islington, E.) McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.)
Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn) Griffiths, Eddie (Brightside) McNamara, J. Kevin
Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green) Griffiths, Will (Exchange) Maginnis, John E.
Campbell, I. (Dunbartonshire, W.) Hamilton, William (Fife, W.) Mahon, Simon (Bootle)
Cant, R. B. Hamling. William Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield, E.)
Carmichael, Neil Hardy, Peter Marks, Kenneth
Carter, Ray (Birmingh'm, Northfield) Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) Marsden, F.
Carter-Jones, Lewis (Eccles) Healey, Rt. Hn. Denis Marshall, Dr. Edmund
Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara Heffer, Eric S. Marten, Nell
Clark, David (Colne Valley) Hooson, Emlyn Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy
Cocks, Michael (Bristol, S.) Horam, John Mayhew, Christopher
Cohen, Stanley Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas Meacher, Michael
Concannon, J. D. Howell, David (Guildford) Mellish, Rt. Hn. Robert
Conlan, Bernard Huckfield, Leslie Mendelson, John
Cox, Thomas (Wandsworth, C.) Hughes. Rt. Hn. Cledwyn (Anglesey) Mikardo, Ian
Crawshaw, Richard Hughes, Mark (Durham) Millan, Bruce
Cronin, John Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen, N.) Miller, Dr. M. S.
Crosland, Rt. Hn. Anthony Hughes, Roy (Newport) Milne, Edward
Crossman, Rt. Hn. Richard Hunter, Adam Mitchell, R. C. (S'hampton, Itchen)
Cunningham, G. (Islington, S.W.) Hutchison, Michael Clark Moate, Roger
Davies, Denzil (Llanelly) Irvine,Rt.Hn.SirArthur(Edge Hill) Molloy, William
Davies, Ifor (Gower) Janner, Greville Molyneaux, James
Davis, Clinton (Hackney, C.) Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire)
Davis, Terry (Bromsgrove) Jeger, Mrs. Lena Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe)
Deakins, Eric Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw)
de Freitas, Rt. Hn. Sir Geoffrey Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford) Morris, Rt. Hn. John (Aberavon)
Dell, Rt. Hn. Edmund John, Brynmor Moyle, Roland
Dempsey, James Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.) Mulley, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Doig, Peter Johnson, Walter (Derby, S.) Murray, Ronald King
Dormand, J. D. Jones, Barry (Flint, E.) Oakes, Gordon
Douglas, Dick (Stirlingshire,E.) Jones, Dan (Burnley) Ogden, Eric
Douglas-Mann, Bruce Jones,Rt.Hn.Sir Elwyn(W.Ham,S.) O'Halloran, Michael
Duffy, A. E. P. Jones, Gwynoro (Carmarthen) O'Malley, Brian
Dunn, James A. Jones, T. Alec (Rhondda, W.) Oram, Bert
Dunnett, Jack Kaufman, Gerald Orme, Stanley
Oswald, Thomas Rose, Paul B. Tomney, Frank
Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, Sutton) Ross, Rt. Hn. William (Kilmarnock) Torney, Tom
Paget, R. T. Rowlands. Ted Turton, Rt. Hn. Sir Robin
Palmer, Arthur Sandelson, Neville Urwin, T. W.
Pannell. Rt. Hn. Charles Sheldon, Robert (Ashton-under-Lyne) Varley, Eric G.
Parker, John (Dagenham) Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney) Wainwright, Edwin
Parry, Robert (Liverpool, Exchange) Short, Rt.Hn.Edward (N'c'tle-u-Tyne) Walden, Brian (B'm'ham, All Saints)
Peart, Rt. Hn. Fred Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford) Walker, Harold (Doncaster)
Pendry, Tom Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dulwich) Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek
Pentland, Norman Sillars, James Wallace, George
Perry, Ernest G. Silverman, Julius Watkins, David
Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch Skinner, Dennis Weitzman, David
Prentice, Rt. Hn. Reg. Small, William Wellbeloved, James
Prescott, John Smith, John (Lanarkshire, N.) Wells, William (Walsall, N.)
Price, J. T. (Westhoughton)
Price, William (Rugby) Spearing, Nigel Whitehead, Phillip
Probert, Arthur Spriggs, Leslie Whitlock, William
Rankin, John Stallard, A. W. Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Reed, D. (Sedgelield) Stoddart, David (Swindon) Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)
Rees, Merlyn (Leeds, S.) Stonehouse, Rt. Hn. John Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)
Rhodes, Geoffrey Strang, Gavin Williams, W. T. (Warrington)
Richard, Ivor Strauss, Rt. Hn. G. R. Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton)
Roberts, Albert (Normanton) Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)
Roberts,Rt.Hn.Goronwy (Caernarvon) Swain, Thomas Woof, Robert
Robertson, John (Paisley) Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery) TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
Roderick, Caerwyn E.(Br'c'n&R'dnor) Thomson, Rt. Hn. G. (Dundee, E.) Mr. Joseph Harper and Mr.
Rodgers, William (Stockton-on-Tees) Tinn, James James Hamilton
Roper, John
NOES
Adley, Robert d'Avigdor-Goldsmid,Maj.-Gen. James Heath, Rt. Hn. Edward
Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) Dean, Paul Heseltine, Michael
Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) Deedes, Bt. Hn. W. F. Hicks, Robert
Archer, Jeffrey (Louth) Dixon, Piers Higgins, Terence L.
Astor, John Drayson, G. B. Hiley, Joseph
Atkins, Humphrey du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward Hill, John E. B. (Norfolk, S.)
Awdry, Daniel Dykes, Hugh Hill, James (Southampton, Test)
Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone) Eden, Rt. Hn. Sir John Holland, Philip
Balniel, Rt. Hn. Lord Edwards, Nicholas (Pembroke) Holt, Miss Mary
Batsford, Brian Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton) Hordern, Peter
Beamish, Col. Sir Tufton Elliott, R. W.(N'c'tle-upon-Tyne,N.) Hornby, Richard
Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay) Emery, Peter Hornsby-Smith.Rt.Hn.Dame Patricia
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport) Eyre, Reginald Howe, Hn. Sir Geoffrey (Reigate)
Benyon, W. Fenner, Mrs. Peggy Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N.)
Berry, Hn. Anthony Fidler, Michael Hunt, John
Biggs-Davison, John Finsberg, Geoffrey (Hampstead) Iremonger, T. L.
Blaker, Peter Fisher, Nigel (Surbiton) James, David
Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S. W.) Fletcher-Cooke, Charles Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford)
Boscawen, Robert Fookes, Miss Janet Johnson Smith, G. (E. Grinstead)
Bossom, Sir Clive Fortescue, Tim Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.)
Bowden, Andrew Foster, Sir John Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith
Braine, Sir Bernard Fowler, Norman Kellett-Bowman, Mrs. Elaine
Bray, Ronald Fry, Peter Kershaw, Anthony
Brinton, Sir Tatton Galbraith, Hn. T. G. King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.)
Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher Gardner, Edward King, Tom (Bridgwater)
Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) Gibson-Watt, David Kinsey, J. R.
Bruce-Gardyne, J. Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.) Kirk, Peter
Bryan, Sir Paul Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.) Kitson, Timothy
Buchanan-Smith, Alick(Angus,N&M) Glyn, Dr. Alan Knight, Mrs. Jill
Buck, Antony Godber, Rt. Hn. J. B. Knox, David
Burden, F. A. Goodhart, Philip Lambton, Lord
Butler, Adam (Bosworth) Goodhew, Victor Lament, Norman
Campbell, Rt.Hn.G.(Moray&Nairn) Gorst, John Lane, David
Carlisle, Mark Gower, Raymond Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry
Carr. Rt. Hn. Robert Grant, Anthony (Harrow, C.) Le Marchant, Spencer
Channon, Paul Gray, Hamish Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland)
Chapman, Sydney Green, Alan Lloyd, Ian (P'tsm'th, Langstone)
Chataway, Rt. Hn. Christopher Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds) Longden, Sir Gilbert
Chichester-Clark, R. Grimond, Rt. Hn. J. Loveridge, John
Clark, William (Surrey, E.) Grylls, Michael Luce, R. N.
Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) Gummer, J. Selwyn McAdden, Sir Stephen
Clegg, Walter Gurden, Harold MacArthur, Ian
Cockeram, Eric Hall, Miss Joan (Keighley) McCrindle, R. A.
Cooke, Robert Hall, John (Wycombe) McLaren, Martin
Cooper, A. E. Hall-Davis, A. G. F. Maclean, Sir Fitzroy
Cordle, John Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Macmillan,Rt.Hn.Maurice (Farnham)
Corfield, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick Hannam, John (Exeter) McNair-Wilson, Michael
Cormack, Patrick Harrison, Brian (Maldon) McNair-Wilson, Patrick (NewForest)
Costain, A. P. Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye) Maddan, Martin
Critchley, Julian Haselhurst, Alan Madel, David
Crouch, David Hastings, Stephen Marples, Rt. Hn. Ernest
Crowder, F. P. Havers, Michael Mather, Carol
Davies, Rt. Hn. John (Knutsford) Hawkins, Paul Maudling, Rt. Hn. Reginald
d'Avlgdor-Goldsmid, Sir Henry Hayhoe, Barney Mawby, Ray
Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)
Meyer, Sir Anthony Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)
Mills, Peter (Torrington) Redmond, Robert Taylor, Robert (Croydon, N.W.)
Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.) Reed, Laurance (Bolton. E.) Tebbit, Norman
Miscampbell, Norman Rees, Peter (Dover) Temple, John M.
Mitchell,Lt.-Col.C.(Aberdeenshire,W) Rees-Davies, W. R. Thatcher, Rt. Hn. Mrs. Margaret
Mitchell. David (Basingstoke) Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David Thomas, John Stradling (Monmouth)
Money, Ernle Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon Thomas, Rt. Hn. Peter (Hendon, S.)
Monks, Mrs. Connie Ridley, Hn. Nicholas Thompson, Sir Richard (Croydon, S.)
Monro, Hector Ridsdale, Julian Thorpe, Rt. Hn. Jeremy
Montgomery, Fergus Rippon, Rt. Hn. Geoffrey Tilney, John
More, Jasper Roberts, Michael (Cardiff, N.) Trafford, Dr. Anthony
Morgan, Geraint (Denbigh) Roberts, Wyn (Conway) Trew, Peter
Morrison, Charles Rost, Peter Tugendhat, Christopher
Mudd, David Royle, Anthony van Straubenzee, W. R.
Murton, Oscar Sandys, Rt. Hn. D Vaughan, Dr. Gerard
Neave, Airey Scott, Nicholas Vickers, Dame Joan
Nicholls, Sir Harmar Sharples, Richard Waddington, David
Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)
Normanton Tom Shelton, William (Clapham) Walker, Rt. Hn. Peter (Worcester)
Nott, John Simeons, Charles Ward, Dame Irene
Onslow, Cranley Sinclair, Sir George Warren, Kenneth
Oppenheim, Mrs. Sally Weatherill, Bernard
Osborn, John Skeet, T. H. H. Wells, John (Maidstone)
Owen, Idris (Stockport, N.) Smith, Dudley (W'wick & L'mington)
Page, Rt. Hn. Graham (Crosby) Soref, Harold White, Roger (Gravesend)
Page, John (Harrow, W.) Speed, Keith Wiggin, Jerry
Parkinson, Cecil Spence, John Wilkinson, John
Percival, Ian Sproat, Iain Winterton, Nicholas
Peyton, Rt. Hn. John Stainton, Keith Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick
Pike, Miss Mervyn Stanbrook, Ivor Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard
Pink, R. Bonner Steel, David Woodnutt, Mark
Price, David (Eastleigh) Stewart-Smith, Geoffrey (Belper) Worsley, Marcus
Prior, Rt. Hn. J. M. L Stodart, Anthony (Edinburgh, W.) Wylie, Rt. Hn. N. R.
Proudfoot, Wilfred Stoddart-Scott, Col. Sir M. Younger, Hn. George
Pym, Rt. Hn. brands Stokes, John TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Quennell, Miss J. M Stuttaford, Dr. Tom Mr. Michael Jopling and
Raison, Timothy Tapsell, Peter Mr. Marcus Fox.

Question accordingly negatived.

The CHAIRMAN then proceeded, pursuant to Order [2nd May], to put forthwith the Question necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded at Eleven o'clock.

Question put, That this Schedule be the Third Schedule to the Bill: —

The Committee divided: Ayes 270, Noes 261.

Division No. 250.] AYES [11.10 p.m.
Adley, Robert Campbell, Rt.Hn.G.(Moray & Nairn) Elliott, Ft. W. (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne,N.)
Alison, Michael (Barkston Ash) Carlisle, Mark Emery, Peter
Allason, James (Hemel Hempstead) Carr, Rt. Hn. Robert Eyre, Reginald
Archer, Jeffrey (Louth) Channon, Paul Fenner, Mrs. Peggy
Astor, John Chapman, Sydney Fidler, Michael
Atkins, Humphrey Chataway, Rt. Hn. Christopher Finsberg, Geoffrey (Hampstead)
Fisher, Nigel (Surbiton)
Awdry, Daniel Chichester-Clark, R. Fletcher-Cooke, Charles
Baker, Kenneth (St. Marylebone) Clark, William (Surrey, E.) Fookes, Miss Janet
Balniel, Rt. Hn. Lord Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) Fortescue, Tim
Batsford, Brian Clegg, Walter Foster, Sir John
Beamish, Col. Sir Tutton Cockeram, Eric Fowler, Norman
Bennett, Sir Frederic (Torquay) Cooke, Robert Fry, Peter
Bennett, Dr. Reginald (Gosport) Cooper, A. E. Galbraith, Hn. T. G.
Benyon, W. Cordle, John Gardner, Edward
Berry, Hn. Anthony Corfield, Rt. Hn. Sir Frederick Gibson-Watt, David
Biggs-Davison, John Cormack, Patrick Gilmour, Ian (Norfolk, C.)
Blaker, Peter Costain, A. P. Gilmour, Sir John (Fife, E.)
Boardman, Tom (Leicester, S.W.) Critchley, Julian Glyn, Dr. Alan
Boscawen, Robert Crouch, David Godber, Rt. Hn. J. B.
Bossom, Sir Clive Crowder, F. P. Goodhart, Philip
Sowden, Andrew Davies. Rt. Hn. John (Knutstord) Goodhew, Victor
Braine, Sir Bernard d'Avigdor Goldsmid, Sir Henry Gorst, John
Bray, Ronald d'Avigdor-Goldsmid,Maj.-Gen.James Gower, Raymond
Brinton, Sir Tatton Dean, Paul Grant, Anthony (Harrow, C.)
Brocklebank-Fowler, Christopher Deedes, Rt. Hn. W. F Gray, Hamish
Brown, Sir Edward (Bath) Dixon, Piers Green, Alan
Bruce-Gardyne, J. Drayson, G. B. Griffiths, Eldon (Bury St. Edmunds)
Bryan, Sir Paul du Cann, Rt. Hn. Edward Grimond, Rt. Hn. J.
Buchanan-Smith, Alick(Angus,N&M) Dykes, Hugh Grylls, Michael
Buck, Antony Eden, Sir John Gummer, Selwyn
Burden, F. A. Edwards, Nicholas (Pembroke) Gurden, Harold
Butler, Adam (Bosworth) Elliot, Capt. Walter (Carshalton) Hall, Miss Joan (Keighley)
Hall, John (Wycombe) Madel, David Scott, Nicholas
Hall-Davis, A. G. F. Marples, Rt. Hn. Ernest Sharples, Richard
Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) Mather, Carol Shaw, Michael (Sc'b'gh & Whitby)
Hannam, John (Exeter) Maudling, Rt. Hn. Reginald Shelton, William (Clapham)
Harrison, Brian (Maldon) Mawby, Ray Simeons, Charles
Harrison, Col. Sir Harwood (Eye) Maxwell-Hyslop, R. J. Sinclair, Sir George
Haselhurst, Alan Meyer, Sir Anthony Skeet, T. H. H.
Hastings, Stephen Mills, Peter (Torrington) Smith, Dudley (W'wick & L'mington
Havers, Michael Mills, Stratton (Belfast, N.) Soref, Harold
Hawkins, Paul Miscampbell, Norman Speed, Keith
Hayhoe, Barney Mitchell,Lt.-Col.C.(Aberdeenshire,W) Spence, John
Heath, Rt. Hn. Edward Mitchell, David (Basingstoke) Sproat, Iain
Heseltine, Michael Money, Ernle Stainton, Keith
Hicks, Robert Monks, Mrs. Connie Stanbrook, Ivor
Higgins, Terence L. Monro, Hector Steel, David
Hiley, Joseph Montgomery, Fergus Stewart-Smith, Geoffrey (Belper)
Hill, John E. B. (Norfolk, S.) More, Jasper Stodart, Anthony (Edinburgh, W.)
Hill, James (Southampton, Test) Morgan, Geraint (Denbigh)
Holland, Philip Morrison, Charles Stoddart-Scott, Col. Sir M.
Holt, Miss Mary Mudd, David Stokes, John
Hordern, Peter Murton, Oscar Stuttaford, Dr. Tom
Hornby, Richard Neave, Airey Tapsell, Peter
Hornsby-Smith.Rt.Hn.Dame Patricia Nicholls, Sir Harmar Taylor, Sir Charles (Eastbourne)
Howe, Hn. Sir Geoffrey (Reigate) Noble, Rt. Hn. Michael Taylor, Frank (Moss Side)
Howell, Ralph (Norfolk, N.) Normanton, Tom Taylor, Robert (Croydon, N.W.)
Hunt, John Nott, John Tebbit, Norman
Iremonger, T. L. Onslow, Cranley Temple, John M.
James, David Oppenheim, Mrs. Sally Thatcher, Rt. Hn. Mrs. Margaret
Jenkin, Patrick (Woodford) Osborn, John Thomas, John Stradling (Monmouth)
Johnson Smith, G. (E. Grinstead) Thomas, Rt. Hn. Peter (Hendon, S.)
Jones, Arthur (Northants, S.) Owen, Idris (Stockport, N.) Thompson, Sir Richard (Croydon, S.)
Joseph, Rt. Hn. Sir Keith Page, Rt. Hn. Graham (Crosby) Thorpe, Rt. Hn. Jeremy
Kellett-Bowman, Mrs. Elaine Page, John (Harrow, W.) Tilney, John
Kershaw, Anthony Parkinson, Cecil Trafford, Dr. Anthony
King, Evelyn (Dorset, S.) Percival, Ian Trew, Peter
King, Tom (Bridgwater) Peyton, Rt. Hn. John Tugendhat, Christopher
Kinsey, J. R. Pike, Miss Mervyn van Straubenzee, W. R.
Kirk, Peter Pink, R. Bonner Vaughan, Dr. Gerard
Kitson, Timothy Price, David (Eastleigh) Vickers, Dame Joan
Knight, Mrs. Jill Prior, Rt. Hn. J. M. L. Waddington, David
Knox, David Proudfoot, Wilfred Walker, Rt. Hn. Peter (Worcester)
Lambton, Lord Pym, Rt. Hn. Francis Ward, Dame Irene
Lamont, Norman Quennell, Miss J. M. Warren, Kenneth
Lane, David Raison, Timothy Weatherill, Bernard
Legge-Bourke, Sir Harry Ramsden, Rt. Hn. James Wells, John (Maidstone)
Le Marchant, Spencer Rawlinson, Rt. Hn. Sir Peter White, Roger (Gravesend)
Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) Redmond, Robert Wiggin, Jerry
Lloyd, Ian (P'tsm'th, Langstone) Reed, Laurance (Bolton, E.) Wilkinson, John
Longden, Sir Gilbert Rees, Peter (Dover) Winterton, Nicholas
Loveridge, John Rees-Davies, W. R. Wolrige-Gordon, Patrick
Luce, R. N. Renton, Rt. Hn. Sir David Wood, Rt. Hn. Richard
McAdden, Sir Stephen Rhys Williams, Sir Brandon Woodnutt, Mark
MacArthur, Ian Ridley, Hn. Nicholas Worsley, Marcus
McCrindle, R. A. Ridsdale, Julian Wylie, Rt. Hn. N. R.
McLaren, Martin Rippon, Rt. Hn. Geoffrey Younger, Hn. George
Maclean, Sir Fitzroy Roberts, Michael (Cardiff, N.)
Macmillan.Rt.Hn.Maurice (Farnham) Roberts, Wyn (Conway) TELLERS FOR THE AYES:
McNair-Wilson, Michael Rost, Peter Mr. Michael Jopling and
McNair-Wilson, Patrick (New Forest) Royle, Anthony Mr. Marcus Fox.
Maddan, Martin Sandys, Rt. Hn. D.
NOES
Abse, Leo Boyden, James (Bishop Auckland) Cronin, John
Allaun, Frank (Salford, E.) Bradley, Tom Crosland, Rt. Hn. Anthony
Archer, Peter (Rowley Regis) Brown, Bob (N'c'tle-upon-Tyne,W.) Crossman, Rt. Hn. Richard
Armstrong, Ernest Brown, Hugh D. (G'gow, Provan) Cunningham, G. (Islington, S.W.)
Ashley, Jack Brown, Ronald (Shoreditch & F'bury) Davies, Denzil (Llanelly)
Ashton, Joe Buchan, Norman Davies, Ifor (Gower)
Atkinson, Norman Buchanan, Richard (G'gow, Sp'burn) Davis, Clinton (Hackney, C.)
Bagier, Gordon, A. T. Butler, Mrs. Joyce (Wood Green) Davis, Terry (Bromsgrove)
Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) Campbell, I. (Dunbartonshire, W.) Deakins, Eric
Barnett, Joel (Heywood and Royton) Cant, R. B. de Freitas, Rt. Hn. Sir Geoffrey
Baxter, William Carmichael, Neil Dell, Rt. Hn. Edmund
Benn, Rt. Hn. Anthony Wedgwood Carter, Ray (Birmingh'm, Northfield) Dempsey, James
Bennett, James (G'gow, Bridgeton) Carter-Jones, Lewis (Eccles) Doig, Peter
Bidwell, Sydney Castle, Rt. Hn. Barbara Dormand, J. D.
Biffen, John Clark, David (Colne Valley) Douglas, Dick (Stirlingshire, E.)
Bishop, E. S. Cocks, Michael (Bristol, S.) Douglas-Mann, Bruce
Blenkinsop, Arthur Cohen, Stanley Duffy, A. E. P.
Boardman, H. (Leigh) Concannon, J. D. Dunn, James A.
Body, Richard Conlan, Bernard Dunnett, Jack
Booth, Albert Cox, Thomas (Wandsworth, C.) Eadie, Alex
Bottomley, Rt. Hn. Arthur Crawshaw, Richard Edelman, Maurice
Edwards, Robert (Bilston) Leonard, Dick Probert, Arthur
Edwards, William (Merioneth) Lever, Rt. Hn. Harold Rankin, John
Ellis, Tom Lewis, Arthur (W. Ham, N.) Reed, D. (Sedgefield)
English, Michael Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) Rees, Merlyn (Leeds, S.)
Evans, Fred Lomas, Kenneth Rhodes, Geoffrey
Ewing, Henry Loughlin, Charles Richard, Ivor
Faulds, Andrew Lyon, Alexander W. (York) Roberts, Albert (Normanton)
Fell, Anthony Lyons, Edward (Bradford, E.) Roberts, Rt.Hn.Goronwy(Caernarvon)
Fisher, Mrs. Doris(B'ham,Ladywood) Mabon, Dr. J. Dickson Robertson, John (Paisley)
Fitch, Alan (Wigan) McBride, Neil Roderick,Caerwyn E.(Br'c'n&R'dnor)
Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) McCartney, Hugh Rodgers, William (Stockton-on-Tees)
Fletcher, Ted (Darlington) McElhone, Frank Roper, John
Foley, Maurice McGuire, Michael Rose, Paul B.
Foot, Michael Mackenzie, Gregor Ross, Rt. Hn. William (Kilmarnock)
Ford, Ben Mackie, John Rowlands, Ted
Forrester, John Mackintosh, John P. Russell, Sir Ronald
Fraser, John (Norwood) Maclennan, Robert Sandelson, Neville
Freeson, Reginald McMillan, Tom (Glasgow, C.) Sheldon, Robert (Ashton-under-Lyne)
Garrett, W. E. McNamara, J. Kevin Shore, Rt. Hn. Peter (Stepney)
Gilbert, Dr. John Maginnis, John E. Short,Rt.Hn.Edward(N'c'tle-u-Tyne)
Ginsburg, David (Dewsbury) Mahon, Simon (Bootle) Silkin, Rt. Hn. John (Deptford)
Golding, John Mallalieu, J. P. W. (Huddersfield,E.) Silkin, Hn. S. C. (Dulwich)
Gourlay, Harry Marks, Kenneth Sillars, James
Grant, George (Morpeth) Marsden, F. Silverman, Julius
Grant, John D. (Islington, E.) Marshall, Dr. Edmund Skinner, Dennis
Griffiths, Eddie (Brightside) Marten, Neil Small, William
Griffiths, Will (Exchange) Mason, Rt. Hn. Roy Smith, John (Lanarkshire, N.)
Hamilton, William (Fife. W.) Mayhew, Christopher Spearing, Nigel
Hamling, William Meacher, Michael Spriggs, Leslie
Hardy, Peter Mellish, Rt. Hn. Robert Stallard, A. W.
Harrison, Walter (Wakefield) Mendelson, John Stoddart, David (Swindon)
Healey, Rt. Hn. Denis Mikardo, Ian Storehouse, Rt. Hn. John
Heffer, Eric S. Millan, Bruce Strang, Gavin
Hooson, Emlyn Miller, Dr. M. S. Strauss, Rt. Hn. G. R.
Horam, John Milne, Edward Summerskill, Hn. Dr. Shirley
Houghton, Rt. Hn. Douglas Mitchell, R. C. (S'hampton, Itchen) Swain, Thomas
Howell, Denis (Small Heath) Moate, Roger Thomas, Jeffrey (Abertillery)
Huckfield, Leslie Molloy, William Thomson, Rt. Hn. G. (Dundee, E.)
Hughes, Rt. Hn. Cledwyn (Anglesey) Molyneaux, James Tinn, James
Hughes, Mark (Durham) Morgan, Elystan (Cardiganshire)
Hughes, Robert (Aberdeen, N.) Morris, Alfred (Wythenshawe) Tomney, Frank
Hughes, Roy (Newport) Morris, Charles R. (Openshaw) Torney, Tom
Hunter, Adam Morris, Rt. Hn. John (Aberavon) Turton, Rt. Hn. Sir Robin
Hutchison, Michael Clark Moyle, Roland Urwin, T. W.
Irvine, Rt. Hn. Sir Arthur (Edge Hill) Mulley, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Janner, Greville Murray, Ronald King Varley, Eric G.
Jay, Rt. Hn. Douglas Oakes, Gordon Wainwright, Edwin
Jeger, Mrs. Lena Ogden, Eric Walden, Brian (B'm'ham, All Saints)
Jenkins, Hugh (Putney) O'Halloran, Michael Walker, Harold (Doncaster)
Jenkins, Rt. Hn. Roy (Stechford) O'Malley, Brian Walker-Smith, Rt. Hn. Sir Derek
John, Brynmor Oram, Bert Wallace, George
Johnson, James (K'ston-on-Hull, W.) Orme, Stanley Watkins, David
Johnson, Walter (Derby, S.) Oswald, Thomas Weitzman, David
Jones, Barry (Flint, E.) Owen, Dr. David (Plymouth, Sutton) Wellbeloved, James
Jones, Dan (Burnley) Paget, R. T. Wells, William (Walsall, N.)
Jones,Rt.Hn.Sir Elwyn(W.Ham,S.) Palmer, Arthur Whitehead, Phillip
Jones, Gwynoro (Carmarthen) Panneil, Rt. Hn. Charles Whitlock, William
Jones, T. Alec (Rhondda, W.) Parker, John (Dagenham) Willey, Rt. Hn. Frederick
Kaufman, Gerald Parry, Robert (Liverpool, Exchange) Williams, Alan (Swansea, W.)
Kelley. Richard Pearl, Rt. Hn. Fred Williams, Mrs. Shirley (Hitchin)
Kerr, Russell Pendry, Tom Williams, W. T. (Warrington)
Kinnock, Neil Pentland, Norman Wilson, Alexander (Hamilton)
Lambie. David Perry, Ernest G. Wilson, William (Coventry, S.)
Lamborn, Harry Powell, Rt. Hn. J. Enoch Woof, Robert
Lamond, James Prentice, Rt. Hn. Reg.
Latham, Arthur Prescott, John TELLERS FOR THE NOES:
Leadbiller. Ted Price, J. T. (Westhoughton) Mr. Joseph Harper and
Lee. Rt. Hn. Frederick Price, William (Rugby) Mr. James Hamilton.

Schedule 3 accordingly agreed to.

It being after Eleven o'clock, The CHAIRMAN left the Chair to report Pro-

gress and ask leave to sit again, pursuant to Order [2nd May].

Committee report Progress; to sit again tomorrow.