HC Deb 28 January 1974 vol 868 cc5-6
3. Dr. John A. Cunningham

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement about the European Economic Community Regional Development Fund.

The Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (Mr. Anthony Grant)

No. Sir. I have at present nothing to add to the statement my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster made on Wednesday 16th January.

Dr. Cunningham

Is the Minister aware that, if Press reports are to be believed, the size of the fund is likely to be decided by almost every consideration except the needs of the regions? Will he assure the House that the Government intend to do something about the far too crude designation of peripheral and central areas, and that in doing so they will not surrender the policy of industrial development certificate control that we have in this country?

Mr. Grant

I do not accept the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. We have always said that we attach considerable importance to the setting up of the regional fund. It is very important to the regions, from one of which the hon. Gentleman comes. His area will be one of the qualifying areas and we shall be fighting hard for it, as for other development areas.

Mr. Marten

What was the original maximum size of the fund which the Government hoped to get?

Mr. Grant

I refer my hon. Friend to the statements by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, who has said that the Commission's proposal of 2,250 million units of account over three years was a substantial sum.

Mr. Elystan Morgan

As it is obvious that any prospects of a meaningful re- gional fund have been destroyed by the aggressive selfishness of our partners in the EEC, would the Minister care to tell the House, so that we may evaluate the prospects of a regional fund in a more general context, what concrete benefits have come to Britain in the 13 months of our membership of the EEC?

Mr. Grant

I do not accept what the hon. Gentleman says. He will have noticed the substantial move made recently by the West German Government which would provide countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy and Ireland with substantially what the Commission proposed. Representatives of the West German Government said at a meeting I attended only on Friday that they regard regional policy as the key to the future growth and development of the Community. The hon. Gentleman's strictures on our partners are unjustified.

Mr. Biffen

Which basis of allocation do the Government prefer, that suggested by the Germans or that suggested by the European Commission?

Mr. Grant

There is to be a further round of negotiations in two days' time, and it would be unwise for me to anticipate those negotiations.

Mr. Booth

Can the Minister give the House an indication when a final decision will be taken by the Council of Ministers on which areas are to benefit from the fund, as and when its benefits become available? Will he confirm that the Government do not accept the present criteria in the proposals in so far as they would exclude one important development area in this country, the Furness development area? Will he assure us that representations are being made to the Council to alter those criteria in a way which will qualify all United Kingdom development areas for such benefits under the fund?

Mr. Grant

We are working to ensure that Furness, the hon. Gentleman's area, is covered by the fund. The first thing to do is to set up the fund, and I hope that the negotiations on 30th January will be successful. No doubt my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster will make a statement on how they progress in due course.