HC Deb 01 May 1975 vol 891 cc720-2
Q3. Mr. Stanley

asked the Prime Minister whether the public speech of the Secretary of State for Industry on the EEC industrial policy, made in Glasgow on 13th April, represented the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Q7. Mr. Blaker

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Secretary of State for Industry, made at Glasgow on 13th April, concerning the effect of membership of the EEC on the working of his Department, represents Government policy.

Mr. Edward Short

I have been asked to reply.

I refer the hon. Members to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Hemsworth (Mr. Woodall) on 17th April.

Mr. Stanley

Was it not extremely inconsistent of the Secretary of State for Industry in that speech to accuse the EEC of interfering in our steel industry when he has been engaging in the most blatant obstruction of Sir Monty Finneston's attempt to establish a viable steel industry in this country?

Mr. Short

Leaving aside the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question—

Mr. Stanley

Why?

Mr. Short

Because the main issue arises on the first part of it. The Question refers to the speech of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry. The Government have no responsibility for speeches made on this matter by dissenting Ministers. That is what the right to dissent means. Ministers can put their point of view in the country, and if they do that the Government do not have to answer for those speeches here.

Mr. Blaker

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in that speech the Secretary of State for Industry asked four questions about our control over North Sea oil and gas? Is he also aware that the answers to those four questions are well known, as they were given to the House on 23rd April by the Department of Energy, and they do not support the point of view of the Secretary of State for Industry on the EEC? Is it not time, therefore, that the right hon. Gentleman was relieved of his post on the grounds of both ignorance and incompetence, in having kicked through his own goal?

Mr. Short

No, Sir. The Secretary of State for Industry is one of the most gifted and able Ministers in the Cabinet. He has claimed the right to dissent, and the right to dissent means no more and no less than the right to put a contrary point of view in the country.

With regard to the speech itself, I was not aware of what was said because I found great difficulty in getting a copy of it.

Mr. Ron Thomas

It is difficult—or it will be—for the British people to make up their minds about the effect upon industry of membership of the EEC, bearing in mind that the Government themselves took a Commission document and distorted it when they reproduced it in their White Paper.

Mr. Short

I do not agree with that. The White Paper and the abbreviated form which has been made public give a balanced view of the case for the Government's recommendation.

I heard the hon. Gentleman's comment on the radio this morning. He referred to it as a jazzy document. It is a bright and up-to-date document which gives a balanced view of the argument for staying in Europe.

Mr. Peyton

In view of the non-responsibility of the Government for speeches made by dissenting Ministers, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether he is aware that the House would be grateful for his straightforward explanation of the ludicrous situation into which the Government have got themselves?

Mr. Short

It is not a ludicrous situation at all, but an extremely honest one. It is much better than the spectacle of a lot of former Ministers, now on the Opposition Front Bench, going back on policies which they have supported for the last few years.

Mr. Pardoe

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the statement in that speech, when the Secretary of State for Industry urged Britain's unfettered right over its own major commodity—North Sea oil—is Government policy? Does he see any contradiction between that view and the view expressed by the Prime Minister today, when he urged the world to surrender its rights over nations' commodities and get together to work for commodity stabilisation?

Mr. Short

There is no conflict at all. The Prime Minister's statement is being made public this afternoon. I shall answer a Written Question about it today.

Back to
Forward to