§ 18. Mr. Wallasked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will make a statement on the future of the Drypool Group in North Humberside.
§ Mr. VarleyThe financial assistance of £325,000 provided by my Department opened up the prospect of completing work on most of the ships on the present order book. After taking full account of the views of the Industrial Development Advisory Board and the receiver, the Government came to the conclusion that the best employment prospects would result from allowing the receiver to negotiate with prospective private purchasers of the component parts.
§ Mr. WallCan the Minister say what he estimates the effect will be on employment levels, particularly in Beverley shipyard? If the Beverley and Selby shipyards are sold off to private enterprise, may we take it that they will not be subject to nationalisation?
§ Mr. VarleyAn undertaking has been given by the receiver that he will try to get private purchasers for this group, which has gone into receivership. I cannot make detailed comments on the prospects for individual yards. I know that the receiver has had discussions with prospective purchasers of the Beverley yard, which I believe is in the hon. Gentleman's constituency. I am told that it may be difficult to find a purchaser who will continue shipbuilding at Beverley, but the receiver sees a prospect of the use of the site for other industrial purposes.
§ Mr. McNamaraIs my right hon. Friend aware that his decision has caused great distress on Humberside among the people employed in the yards, particularly those in my constituency, and that it has been regarded as reneging on the original proposals published during the last Session of Parliament? Why is he not prepared to be open about the advice that he has received, so that we can see whether his judgment is well founded? Further, is my right hon. Friend aware that we cannot see that it holds out a great deal for the future of the shipbuilding industry as a nationalised undertaking if he thinks that these yards would be better in private hands?
§ Mr. VarleyI am prepared to consider this matter further with my hon. Friend, who has shown some concern. The impression has been given that this group is of long standing. In fact, it was not formed until 1973. There are eight units within the group, employing just over 1,000 men. They have lost money on 17 1249 out of the last 18 orders which they obtained. They have not obtained orders for the past two years. It really made no industrial or commercial sense to keep it together, and certainly not to keep it within the Bill.