National Enterprise Board (Hansard, 25 April 1977)

§ 13. Mr. Canavan
asked the Secretary of State for Industry when he next expects to meet the Chairman of the National Enterprise Board.

§ Mr. Varley
I meet Lord Ryder frequently, as business requires. The next occasion arranged is on 6th May, but there may be other occasions before then.

§ Mr. Canavan
Will my right hon. Friend discuss with the chairman the future prospects of British Leyland? Would it not be opportune to proceed as soon as possible with the development of a new British Leyland Mini, bearing in mind that the advantages of a smaller car for energy conservation purposes are belatedly being recognised even by American millionaires and peanut farmers?

§ Mr. Varley
As I told the House earlier this afternoon, the proposal for the cars plan is currently under review by the British Leyland Board and the National Enterprise Board, and as soon as we have it we shall study it and take whatever steps are required to inform the House of Commons. I am very much in favour of a motor car industry which is geared to recognise the energy constraints that will be with us for many years to come.

§ Mrs. Chalker
In view of the continuing high structural unemployment on Merseyside, can the Secretary of State say when he expects the North-West Director of the National Enterprise Board to report on the study currently being undertaken into this very serious problem?

§ Mr. Varley
I can tell the House that I have received a draft report from the National Enterprise Board studying the situation not only in Merseyside but in the North-East too. I shall consider whether the final report, when we receive it, can be published. I and my colleagues have not yet appraised it fully, but progress has been made in the direction asked for by the hon. Lady.

§ Mr. Wrigglesworth
When my right hon. Friend next meets the Chairman of the National Enterprise Board, will he bear in mind the very strong fears of Government supporters about a GEC monopoly in the power plant industry? Will he remember the backing that there is—which has been expressed frequently—for 708 an NEB involvement and interest in any new structure that comes about?

§ Mr. Varley
I understand that my hon. Friend and others of my hon. Friends are concerned about the position in the heavy power plant industry. I, too, am very concerned to see that the industry is preserved. If there were no Government involvement, this industry and Parsons in particular would be under severe strain. The negotiations are extremely difficult and sensitive, and when colleagues in the House of Commons make statements which are inaccurate and in some cases pure fabrication our life is made much more difficult.

§ Mr. Norman Lamont
Appreciating that there is a legal action outstanding about the NEB's intervention in the tanning industry, may I ask the Secretary of State this general question? If the NEB is to support loss-making companies before profitable ones in industry that have already contracted, will that not simply transfer unemployment? Will he discuss this matter with the NEB?

§ Mr. Varley
Of course I shall discuss this matter with the NEB. We have always made plain, since the National Enterprise Board was set up and the Industry Bill was before the House in 1975, that it was no part of Government policy that the NEB should be the repository of lame ducks, or whatever the current phrase is at the time. However, the NEB has made an encouraging start. Apart from the eight Government shareholdings transferred to it, it has made 15 investments on its own account, and I think that it has been extremely successful. One cannot be absolutely sure that every NEB involvement will be successful, but so far it has operated on a very prudent basis, I think to the benefit of the nation.

§ Mr. Mike Thomas
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In referring to me, my right hon. Friend clearly implied that I had made both inaccurate and fabricated statements. I should like to seek your protection.

§ Mr. Speaker
If the hon. Member will be kind enough to raise the matter at the end of Question Time, I shall do my best to protect him.

§ Mr. Mike Thomas
On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The main substance of my contention this afternoon is that my right hon. Friend is now prepared to see GEC make a straight takeover of C. A. Parsons, a firm, in my constituency

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. May I explain to the hon. Gentleman that all he may raise with me is his point of order?

§ Mr. Mike Thomas
My point of order is to ask whether I am not entitled to the Chair's protection when my right hon. Friend's course is clearly to deny or confirm the statement and not to abuse me and accuse me of making misleading, inaccurate and fabricated statements.

§ Mr. Speaker
When the Minister made the reference to fabricated statements, I believe that he did not refer to any particular hon. Member. I know that he had addressed the hon. Gentleman earlier, but there was no occasion for me to intervene in the exchange that took place.

§ Mr. Mike Thomas
I apologise if I am being tedious about this, Mr. Speaker, but can I be clear that my right hon. Friend is not accusing me of making fabricated statements?

§ Mr. Speaker
I detect no movement anywhere on the Government Front Bench.