§ Q2. Mr. Carterasked the Prime Minister if he will now appoint to the Central Policy Review Staff a member with special responsibility for investment.
§ The Prime MinisterI refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply which I have just given to the hon. Lady the Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Renée Short).
§ Mr. CarterAs far as my Question is concerned, is not the Prime Minister aware that that is a very complacent statement, particularly when one bears in mind what he has been saying on the subject of investment over the past few days? Would he not agree that, unless there is a dramatic improvement in investment in the course of the next few months, the current high growth rate will prove to have been a very short-lived affair?
§ The Prime MinisterThere was nothing complacent about my reply. What I said was that I do not propose to appoint to the CPRS members with specific commitments of the kind for which the hon. Gentleman is asking.
On the general point about investment, both the DTI investment intentions and the recent CBI survey, I am glad to say, now show a welcome increase in investment.
§ Mr. McCrindleIs it not clear that industrial investment is now, albeit somewhat belatedly, proceeding apace? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the only remaining barrier to an increase in 1199 industrial investment is the plans for future public ownership published by the Labour Party?
§ The Prime MinisterYes, Sir. My hon. Friend is quite right. All the indications now are that investment is increasing rapidly, and will do so through 1973 and 1974. I have never hesitated to make plain my view that the increase in investment ought to have come long ago, but that does not alter the fact that it is now very welcome when it is coming.
§ Mr. HealeyDoes not the DTI survey show that, even if the prognostication is fulfilled, investment this year will still be 13 per cent. below the level of 1970? As the Prime Minister has publicly admitted to the Institute of Directors that the lavish inducements showered on business in order to persuade it to invest have totally failed in their purpose, will he now instruct the Chancellor to withdraw these inducements as they involve tax give-aways to those who are already wealthy, which is profoundly offensive to the working people whose consent the right hon. Gentleman is now seeking for phase 3 of his prices and incomes policy?
§ The Prime MinisterExactly the reverse is the case. If the right hon. Gentleman had been in contact with the union leaders in these discussions, he would know that there was nothing which they wanted more or would welcome more than a great increase in investment. It is the trade union leaders who have pressed us to give the inducements to the regions which are now producing the investment.