HC Deb 12 July 1978 vol 953 cc1499-503
16. Mr. Neubert

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment what further discussions he proposes to have with representatives of building and construction industry employers regarding the nationalisation of the building industry.

20. Mr. McCrindle

asked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he has any plans to meet leaders of the building industry in the near future.

Mr. Shore

My right hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction and I have regular meetings with representatives of the construction industry and I shall be seeing leaders of the organisations in the group of eight on 28th July. Since I have no proposals to nationalise the building and construction industry, I see no reason why this item should feature on our agenda.

Mr. Neubert

Can the Secretary of State explain why his hon. Friends are so upset at the prominence given by the current poster campaign about the Labour Party's plans to nationalise the building industry? As the General Election approaches, would not he and they wish for that policy to be given as much publicity as possible, including such details as the likely initial costs of up to £2¾ billion and subsequent annual costs of £½ billion—or is it that since the recent national survey has shown that four people out of five do not want any more nationalisation, the Government at least have changed their mind?

Mr. Shore

I have no comment to make on the rather extraordinary arithmetic which the hon. Member has put before the House, but, quite naturally, all responsible persons, including virtually all my right hon. and hon. Friends. deeply resent tendentious advertising in constituencies—advertising which seeks, as it were, to upset and disturb people about proposals which are certainly not in the programme of this Government and which are being discussed in the NEC of the Labour Party. If we were to retaliate in kind and take up all over the country, for example, the proposals put to the Conservative Shadow Cabinet by the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley), in which he proposed the denationalisation of half a dozen of our industries, including selling off the BNOC, dismantling the NEB and turning our pits into miners' co-operatives, the Tories, too, would feel slightly upset.

Mr. McCrindle

In a genuine attempt to seek information on behalf of my constituents, may I ask the Secretary of State why, as a Socialist, he is clearly in favour of public ownership of the construction industry while as a member of the Cabinet he is either non-committal or, dare one assume, opposed to it? May I ask the right hon. Gentleman, further, whether he attended the Labour Party conference when it was decided that this should become Labour Party policy and, if so, whether on that occasion he voted for or against the proposal?

Mr. Shore

My major concern—and it is the major concern of Government supporters—is with the efficiency of the construction industry, as it is with many of our other industries. It is with the security of its employees. It is also with maintaining as high a level of employment in the industry as we possibly can. We shall always be prepared to consider measures which promote those ends. I think that that is probably sufficient answer to the hon. Member.

Mr. Heffer

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Labour Party has never called for the nationalisation of the construction industry? The policy statement approved by the Labour Party conference called for a measure of public ownership by the establishment of a national building corporation, by the development and extension of direct labour organisations, and by the encouragement of co-operatives at the lowest level. It is an absolute lie that the Conservative Party and the employers, through their campaign CABIN, are trying to put about the country, which will in fact have a reverse effect, because the people are not stupid and will recognise when lies are being told by the Opposition.

Mr. Shore

My hon. Friend is right, of course. It is an absurd propaganda activity which is being engaged in by the Opposition. I might add to what my hon. Friend said about what was in the proposal that, as it was presented to the Labour Party conference last year, it said specifically, at the end, that The present statement and the background document which accompanies it represent only an interim report to the party. That is often the case. Matters are always considered seriously and thoroughly between the party and the Government.

Sir Walker-Smith

The original Question relates to employers. Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether UCATT is as yet on record in regard to this matter and, if so, to what effect?

Mr. Heffer

Yes. It supports the NEC.

Mr. Shore

I cannot deal with the right hon. and learned Gentleman's question in detail—

Mr. Heffer

I can. I am a member.

Mr. Shore

—but I know very well that the unions concerned would subscribe to my general definition of purpose in the construction industry, that we should take all measures to deal with the uncertainties of employment, that we should promote decasualisation, that we should try to maintain a more even work load, and that we should do all in our power to bring down the level of unemployment. The House may be interested and even pleased to know that this month, for the first time in two or three years, unemployment figures have fallen well below 200,000, to about 177,000.

Mr. Frank Allaun

Why should the big building employers be so upset about the proposals to permit corporation direct labour departments to tender for building contracts in neighbouring authorities? Is it the fear that this will put their own quotations in danger and also draw attention to the 133 price rings now operated by private firms in the building industry?

Mr. Shore

My hon. Friend has rightly drawn attention to what has long been the policy of this Government, which is to seek to put an end to the unnecessary restrictions placed upon direct labour organisations and also to put them upon a manifestly fair and competitive basis.

Mr. Rossi

Is the Secretary of State aware that when the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) introduced the proposals contained in this document "Building Britain's Future", he spoke of the "step by step public ownership of the construction industry"? Therefore, when the Secretary of State meets representatives of this industry, will he assure them that he would never allow these proposals to become the policy of any Government of which he was a Minister?

Mr. Shore

I thought that there was a consensus in all parts of the House that we never used the word "never". If the Opposition had used the word "never", they would have been in great difficulties when they had to nationalise Rolls-Royce and UCS a few years ago.