§ 10. Mr. Tebbitasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will introduce legislation to avoid waste and excessive costs in local authority direct labour building organisations.
§ 13. Mr. John Pageasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will take steps to ensure that local authorities adopt improved accountancy management procedures in order to avoid losses and excessive costs in local authority direct labour building organisations and in related ancillary services such as architects and civil engineering departments.
§ 16. Mr. Ridleyasked the Secretary of State for the Environment if he will recommend improved accountancy and management procedures to local authorities in order to avoid losses and excessive costs in local authority direct labour building organisations.
§ Mr. FreesonYes, Sir.
§ Mr. TebbitWhat an extraordinary answer. Is the Minister aware that his intentions about future legislation are now totally irrelevant? More to the point, will he say why he resisted the bringing forward of legislation to control the waste and inefficiency of direct labour organisations for so long, when his noble Friend representing the Government in the House of Lords welcomed and supported the private Member's Bill of my noble Friend, Lord Kinnoull?
§ Mr. FreesonI shall not comment on the somewhat garbled reference to what happened in another place. It is sufficient for me to look after affairs within my area in this place, for the moment anyway.
The hon. Gentleman is wrong. We did not resist the measure. We drafted a Bill. We presented it. The Opposition—including the hon. Gentleman—opposed it, and because of our minority position as a Government we had to withdraw it.
§ Mr. PageIs the Minister aware that my hon. Friends and I, from the Government Back Benches, will press the Government after 15 May to reduce the 1312 amount of work done by direct labour organisations and also the direct supply of architectural, surveying and other services?
§ Mr. FreesonThe hon. Gentleman had better save his prejudiced pressures for his own Front Bench spokesmen for another occasion, under whatever circumstances. If the Opposition turn their attention to a large number of Conservative councils, they will meet some resistance to some of their prejudiced attitudes. There are 456 direct labour organisations in local government in England and Wales, a large number of which are run by Conservative councils.
§ Mr. RidleyIs it not utterly cynical to decide to legislate to protect the interests of ratepayers after the time when legislation may conceivably be introduced by the Government, especially having wasted five years resisting the proposal? Will the Minister give us his pledge of support for this measure should be personally, by chance, be re-elected?
§ Mr. FreesonI found it difficult to follow that somewhat circumlocutory question. The answer is that the hon. Gentleman, like his hon. Friend the Member for Chingford (Mr. Tebbit), has got it wrong. The Government prepared a Bill to deal with those matters. It would have provided for proper and efficient accounting procedures. It would also have placed capital works projects by DLOs on virtually the same footing as that for private enterprise firms. In 1976 the Opposition prevented us from introducing that Bill. They, and not the Government, must carry the can for that.
§ Mr. CryerIs my right hon. Friend satisfied that local authorities have sufficient protection against private enterprise organisations working for local authorities? Does he recall that Taylor "We built Ronan Point" Woodrow cost the nation about £40 million at current prices to restore the difficulties that arose from Ronan Point? Does he accept that Bradford, which is a Tory-controlled council, replaced the two shoddy private enterprise contractors in Keighley by a direct works department because it recognised that it would be more efficient and effective?
§ Mr. FreesonIt is right to place on record, as there is so much deliberate 1313 misrepresentation on this matter by the Opposition and others, that time and time again the capital works departments or sections of DLOs around the country have to step into contracts to pick up the pieces left behind by the disasters of private enterprise.
§ Mr. Stephen RossWill the Minister accept that he could very easily have got the Bill through the House had he restricted it to direct accounting procedures in local government? The Bill that he talked about was a comprehensive measure to extend the whole range of DLOs throughout the country. That was why, during the Lib-Lab pact, he could not get Opposition support for his Bill.
§ Mr. FreesonI well understand why the hon. Gentleman, for whom I have a very high regard, is feeling a little sensitive about this matter. He did not even read the Bill at the time, otherwise he would have known that it provided for the sort of thing that he wanted. Had he read the Bill and come to see us about it, he would have known that what we were seeking to do was to put DLOs on the same footing as equivalent private enterprise firms. The Opposition resisted the Bill and it was lost. When we come back to office we shall reintroduce it.
§ Mr. HeseltineIf I may be allowed to anticipate the inevitable events of the next few weeks, I should like to say to my hon. Friend the Member for Harrow, West (Mr. Page) that we shall take action in the next Government to deal with direct labour organisations.
Will the right hon. Gentleman understand that what he is saying to the House is inconsistent with the facts as the House knows them? He must remember that 1314 the Bill that he wanted to introduce—as the hon. Member for Isle of Wight (Mr. Ross) said—sought to extend the powers of the direct labour organisations. It was not simply to try to make them more efficient. Will the Minister remember that from this Dispatch Box I offered him every support in getting through a Bill to do what he said this afternoon he wanted to do? It was because that was not the purpose of the Bill that the right hon. Gentleman was not able to get it through this House.
§ Mr. FreesonThe hon. Gentleman had not even read the proposals that we had put forward. He was so full of his prejudices—as were other Members, including at that time Liberal Members—against DLOs that he, like them, did not even bother to find out what we were proposing. The Bill is in draft in the Department. [Interruption.] If we tear it up we shall destroy the very thing for which people are now asking. We introduced proposals in 1976, and Opposition Members, in an unholy alliance, resisted them. That is why we did not get the Bill which would have put things right.
§ Mr. RidleyOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of those replies, I give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the first possible opportunity.
§ Mr. LitterickOn a point of order, Mr. Speaker.
§ Mr. SpeakerWith respect to the hon. Member, I shall take his point of order immediately after I have made the short statement that I wish to make to the House.