§ Q3. Mr. Tim Rentonasked the Prime Minister whether the speech by the Secretary of State for Industry in Glasgow on 13th April on industrial questions represents Government policy.
§ Q9. Mr. Peter Morrisonasked the Prime Minister whether the speech by the Secretary of State for Industry in Glasgow 1210 on 13th April 1975 concerning industrial policy represents Government policy.
§ Mr. Edward ShortI 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. RentonDoes the right hon. Gentleman recall that in earlier answers about this speech he said that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry had the right of dissent on EEC matters? Does that right of dissent extend to the Industry Bill? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Secretary of State for Industry is now proposing compulsory powers of disclosure of confidential information that clearly differ from the pledge given in this House on 25th February by the Prime Minister?
§ Mr. ShortI am not aware of anything that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry has said which conflicts with the Bill now before the Committee.
§ Mr. MorrisonWill the right hon. Gentleman take this opportunity to point out that his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry was misleading the electorate when he said that were we to remain part of the Common Market we would lose control of North Sea oil?
§ Mr. ShortAs I pointed out last week, fortunately I do not have to answer for the speeches of dissenting Ministers. That is what the right of dissent means. It is the right to put forward their point of view and their interpretation of facts when speaking in the country. It means nothing more and nothing less than that.
§ Mr. William HamiltonDoes my right hon. Friend appreciate the nonsense of hearing the Secretary of State for Industry and now the Secretary of State for Scotland saying in Scotland that we cannot apply our regional policies if we remain within the EEC when at the same time we are putting through legislation in this House, to apply both sides of the border, that is based on the opposite assumption?
§ Mr. ShortNeither my right hon. Friend nor I would agree that we are not free to carry out our own regional policies, but my two right hon. Friends 1211 are entitled to put their point of view on this matter.
§ Mr. WhitelawFurther to what my hon. Friend the Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton) said, it is clear from what we are now being told by the Secretary of State for Industry and his Ministers that the words of the Prime Minister on the Industry Bill are being flouted and that his clear undertaking to the House is now being at least removed by the Secretary of State for Industry. Will the Leader of the House warn his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister when he comes back of what is happening and suggest to him that now is the moment to bring the Secretary of State for Industry to hook and, on this occasion, into line with Government policy?
§ Mr. ShortIn the absence of the Prime Minister I keep a pretty close eye on what is happening. I have seen no conflict whatever between what the Secretary of State for Industry is saying and what appears in the Industry Bill. However, I shall consider the point that the right hon. Gentleman has made.
§ Mr. HefferWill my right hon. Friend acknowledge that the right hon. Member for Penrith and the Border (Mr. Whitelaw) is talking utter rubbish in relation to the Industry Bill and that there is no difference between that public Bill and what the Government are putting through in the House? The position is perfectly understandable and has been explained by the Prime Minister and by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry.
§ Mr. ShortAs I have said twice already, I am not aware of any conflict between what the Prime Minister has said and what appears in the Bill or what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry has said, but certainly I shall look into the point that has been made.