§ 5. Mr. Dewarasked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will now make a statement setting out how the shipbuilding industry on the Clyde will be affected by British Shipbuilders' corporate plan and the Government's attitude to this.
§ Mr. ButlerMy right hon. Friend will be making a policy statement about shipbuilding as soon as possible.
§ Mr. DewarWill the Minister take this opportunity to confirm or deny the report in The Daily Telegraph on 19 June that he specifically asked for estimates of the cost of closing yards? If that is so, and any closures are contemplated, will he make sure that the costs are made public and published so that we can all judge the need for any particular closure? Does he also accept that there is now great anxiety on Clydeside about the future of the industry, and that that has not been allayed by the visit of the Secretary of State, which was compared in industrial terms by one of my constituents with the passing of the Angel of Death?
§ Mr. ButlerWe recognise that there is anxiety in the shipbuilding industry about the future because of the gravity of the situation. That is why we hope to make a statement as soon as we can. As to the hon. Gentleman's first point, I am sure that, like me, he does not believe every word which he reads in newspapers. The Government have asked British Shipbuilders to review the options which it put to the previous Administration, which lay on the table for a number of months. Circumstances have changed. We are looking at the facts, and when we have examined them and carried out 6 various other consultations we shall be in a position to make a statement.
§ Mr. Gordon WilsonDoes the Minister accept that there is also worry and anxiety on the east coast of Scotland about the future of the shipbuilding industry, largely because of the shortage of orders and the lack of any sign that orders are coming forward? Will he indicate why, in view of those facts, he was not prepared to give help in order to bring to Scotland the Shell-Esso contract for the multipurpose vessel, which would have provided the employment that is badly needed? The view is forming that it is the Government's intention to assassinate the industry.
§ Mr. ButlerThe circumstances surrounding the decision about the Shell-Esso vessel have received a certain amount of publicity. It is not for me to comment on the detail that was published. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that the degree of subsidy required of Government was not justified in the circumstances.
§ Mrs. Kellett-BowmanWhen my hon. Friend the Minister is considering the submissions with regard to the future of British shipbuilding, will he bear in mind the necessity for the covered facility at Barrow, which is a very profitable yard—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I ought to have stopped the hon. Member for Dundee, East (Mr. Wilson). This question relates to shipbuilding on the Clyde. If there are questions about other parts of the United Kingdom, they ought to go on the Order Paper.
Mrs. Kellet-BowmanWith respect, Mr. Speaker, if too much money goes to the Clyde, too little will go to Barrow. That is why I raised the matter. May I therefore continue? I have not finished my question—
§ Mr. SpeakerOrder. I am quite sure that the hon. Lady has not finished. I do not like crossing swords with a lady, but the hon. Lady will realise that this question is about industry on the Clyde. It is unfair to others if we extend it to other parts of the United Kingdom.
§ Dr. John CunninghamWill not the hon. Gentleman now give an unequivocal assurance that it is the Government's 7 intention to maintain a viable British shipbuilding industry?
§ Mr. ButlerThe Government would like to see a viable merchant shipbuilding industry, if that is possible. But I am sure the hon. Gentleman is as aware as I am of the shortage of orders and the seriousness of the situation in the yards. It is exactly those circumstances, and others, that we must take into account.
§ 30. Mr. Gregor MacKenzieasked the Secretary of State for Industry if he will make a statement on his visit to the shipyards on Clydeside.
§ Mr. ButlerMy right hon. Friend will make a policy statement about shipbuilding as soon as possible.
§ Mr. MacKenzieWe all want to maintain the maximum number of jobs on Clydeside and to modernise Clydeside. There is fierce competition from other shipyards. Can we be sure even at this stage that the right hon. Gentleman has not ruled out the possibility of a reasonable intervention fund to help?
§ Mr. ButlerWhen I arrived in the Department the intervention fund had lapsed by some weeks. One of my first actions was to try to arrange a transition period until a new intervention fund could be established. I hope that that will happen very shortly.
§ Dr. BrayIs it true that British Aerospace positively steered the order for the new Shell-Esso offshore support vessel to Finland as part of a counterpart trade deal for the purchase of aircraft by Finland? Was that done with the Department's knowledge?
§ Mr. ButlerIf the hon. Gentleman had been here earlier during Question Time he would have heard that question asked and the answer.
§ Dr. John CunninghamIs not the hon. Gentleman being less than straight with the House? Had not the previous Administration already announced their intention to re-establish the intervention fund at £85 million? Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that the Government will comply with that?
§ Mr. ButlerIt is correct that a statement was made by the previous Administration about the future of the interven- 8 tion fund. The fund had lapsed and I had to negotiate immediately for a transitional arrangement—at least—with the Commissioner.