HC Deb 26 January 1976 vol 904 cc11-3
6. Mr. Canavan

asked the Secretary of State for Industry how many representations he has received from private industrialists for Government assistance since 1st January 1976.

Mr. Gregor Mackenzie

I regret that statistics for this period are not yet available.

Mr. Canavan

Can my hon. Friend tell me whether there has been any recent change in the Government's strategy for dealing with such representations? Can he give me assurance that if Mr. Riccardo or some similar character comes along with a begging bowl, not one penny of public money will be used unless there is adequate public control over it and special measures are taken to safeguard the job security of the workers employed in the industry?

Mr. Mackenzie

There has been no change in the method of collecting statistics. I give my hon. Friend the assurance that all applications under any section of the Industry Act are dealt with on an individual basis. We shall have to see what the applications are before we make a judgment on them.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that it is insulting and distorting the truth for him to talk about private industry coming forward with a begging bowl when the Government have been round with the begging bowl to every sheikhdom that might have some money to lend to Britain? Does he further agree that British industry contributes a vast sum in taxation without which it would not be possible for the Government to carry on?

Mr. Mackenzie

I do not think that that matter arises on this Question. British industry makes a substantial contribution. We are not the only people who are running around with begging bowls. If I were a member of the Tory Party I should bear in mind the begging bowls that go round to industrialists at every election, and I should have less to say for myself. The issue raised by the hon. Gentleman does not arise here. If he has a specific question to ask, perhaps he will do so.

9. Mr. Peter Morrison

asked the Secretary of State for Industry what criteria he uses when he is dispensing public money to companies which are in financial difficulties.

Mr. Varley

I would refer the hon. Member to "Criteria for Assistance to Industry" placed in the Library on 12th January which sets out the Government's present guidelines for selective assistance.

Mr. Morrison

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many employees in successful and strike-free plants believe that the Government decision to bail out unsuccessful companies, particularly Chrysler, is endangering their security of employment? They also believe that, despite their admirable record, they are being put at a disadvantage compared with employees in the unsuccessful plants.

Mr. Varley

I think that the hon. Gentleman over-simplifies this matter. For example, if he casts his mind back, he will remember that his own Government introduced the Industry Act 1972, Sections 7 and 8 of which were specifically designed to help companies in difficulties. Of course assistance should be given to achieve long-term viability. If he gets a chance to study the paper "Criteria for Assistance to Industry", which is not only in the Library for him to read but has been considered by the National Economic Development Council, he will know our general approach to this matter.

Dr. M. S. Miller

May I suggest that my right hon. Friend adds to those criteria the criterion that if an industry or part of an industry or a company in an industrial group is viable, efficient and profitable—like the Rolls-Royce factory at Blantyre—it should not be closing complete factories in its rationalisation programme?

Mr. Varley

I know something of the problem at Blantyre to which my hon. Friend refers; I think that he is in correspondence with my Department about it. We hope to consider the matter carefully and to let him have an answer in due course.

13. Mr. Rooker

asked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will seek powers to make it a condition of Government assistance under the new industrial strategy that recipient firms should have in their employ properly qualified engineering personnel.

The Under-Secretary of State for Industry (Mr. Neil Carmichael)

No, Sir. But the appraisal of applications for selective assistance includes an examination of the management resources and expertise relevant to the objective of the proposal.

Mr. Rooker

As one of the very small band of chartered engineers in the House, may I urge my hon. Friend to look carefully at the suggestion and to ensure that something is done, as the engineering institutions are in complete disarray at the moment? Does not my hon. Friend agree that some stick is required to get them to pull together for the benefit of the economy and to bring about an improvement in training and qualifications, in which respect we are lamentably behind the rest of Europe?

Mr. Carmichael

I shall certainly take note of my hon. Friend's point, but, as he will see from the criteria discussed in relation to an earlier Question, the Department deals with a very wide range of cases, from pharmaceuticals to poultry, and each has to be looked at individually. Our concern is that there should be proper experts within each industry when it comes within an agreement.

Mr. Tebbit

I accept what the Minister says about the difficulties of administering cases ranging from pharmaceuticals to poultry, from pills to lame ducks, or whatever it is. However, will he agree that it would be a good idea to check the qualifications of those giving the assistance? Would it not be a good idea for the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to appear before the Select Committee so that we can discover the medicine that enabled him in the Cabinet to override the judgment of the Secretary of State for Industry on the Chrysler affair?

Mr. Carmichael

That is rather wide of the Question. The decision on Chrysler was a Cabinet decision. My right hon. Friend is the Minister responsible and is the appropriate person to go before the Select Committee.