§ Mr. Albert Booth (Barrow-in-Furness)I beg to move amendment No. 1, in page 2, line 2, at end insert
'Subsidiary" in this subsection shall not be deemed to include British Rail Engineering Limited.'.The object of the amendment is clear. It is to keep British Rail Engineering Ltd. strictly within the scope of British Railways and the British Railways Board and to remove the ability that the Bill would confer on the Minister to instruct the board to sell the engineering subsidiary or to prevent British Railways from seeking the consent of the Minister to sell the subsidiary.I make it clear that British Railways has, to the best of my knowledge, at no time suggested to the Government that it would wish to dispose of BREL. The amendment is merely a fall-back if we do not succeed in defeating the Bill or at least securing a wider amendment to prevent BR from ever being forced to sell subsidiaries.
BREL employs 36,000 people and has 13 workshops. Under the Bill, a number of those jobs and workshops could be at risk. The workshops' income rose from £178 million in 1975 to £378 million in 1979. Although they are largely geared to the highly specialised needs of BR, that has not prevented them from building up a considerable and worthwhile trade, when not fully utilised in supplying BR's needs, in building trains and wagons for other railway systems. BREL has built up a substantial export business. In the last financial year for which there are records, over £30 million came from sales to private customers, mainly overseas. It is an important and thriving business, mainly concerned with supplying the specialised needs of BR, but also supplying other railways throughout the world. Its current order book, which stands at about £50 million, includes orders from the Swiss and a number of African railways. In our economic position, we should not sneeze at that income or put it at risk.
BREL is a public business that has been improving its productivity substantially. In its last operating year it achieved a 10 per cent. increase in output, with an increase of only 2 per cent. in staff. In the previous year it increased productivity by 9 per cent.
In considering an amendment to a Bill, the first part of which is largely taken up by the Government's obsession with denationalisation, the House should realise that BREL has close links with many private sector manufacturers. Considerable parts of the private sector involving railway wagon and locomotive manufacture depends on arrangements with BREL. About 70 per cent. of new rolling stock components used by the subsidiary are purchased from the private sector and even 50 per cent. of the repair work involves purchases from the private sector.
The subsidiary has developed excellent production facilities. Last Friday I had the pleasure of visiting the Horwich works in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Westhoughton (Mr. Stott), and I was particularly impressed by the foundry capacity that has been developed. It is probably the finest in the world.
It is notable that before the Bill was introduced no hint was given that it would cover BREL. The Tory manifesto certainly gave no hint that British Rail subsidiaries would be involved in denationalisation. At that time the National Freight Corporation was the only transport organisation to be denationalised.
176 The subsidiary provides a vital service to the British Railways Board. By taking only the contracts that it can cope with without limiting its service to BR, it earns money for the country through private sales while sustaining BR's capacity at a lower unit cost than if the workshops stood idle when not required to meet peak demands. In private hands, the company would not do that. Private management would gear to the troughs rather than the peaks of BR demand and keep for BR only the capacity that it could not continually fill with private work. Sale could also delay the investment programme, limit the capacity of the most profitable operation of existing facilities and jeopardise jobs and BR's income brought in by the service.
The Secretary of State says that he has no current intention to sell BREL. I hope that he will consider the many propositions for railway investment that would involve the subsidiary in a considerable amount of work. If he has no current intention to sell he does not need the provision in the Bill. If in future he has a serious case for selling BREL, he can then bring it to the House. We pressed him on the matter on Second Reading and in Committee, and he had no case to deploy. Therefore, we should pass the amendment to make a Bill which is causing concern to all in the public transport business a little less repulsive.
§ Mr. Harry Cowans (Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Central)I support my right hon. Friend the Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Booth). Apart from those dedicated Members who sat through the Committee stage, all of the Conservative Members seem to have belted off somewhere. As that is the nature of this place, I suppose that we must simply go on.
The purpose of the Bill is to hive off assets to private enterprise. Let us start the book at the first page. The railways were originally run by private enterprise companies. Those companies saw the wisdom of having their own workshops not only for building stock but for day-to-day heavy maintenance. So even under private enterprise the wisdom of owning the wherewithal to carry out maintenance and to experiment in building stock was foreseen. The Minister now says that private enterprise was wrong to do that, yet he is seeking to give British Rail Engineering Ltd. back to private enterprise. The analogy is similar through all the hiving-off provisions in the Bill.
Let us imagine what could happen. BREL does not carry out only major work. It does not build only locomotives and carriages. It also carries out heavy maintenance jobs. Its works are strategically placed across the country. That is no accident. It grew out of the old companies, which sited works within each region for the benefit of those private enterprise companies. They saw that it would be wrong to place maintenance and new stock needs with an outside monopoly. Yet that is what the Bill could do. There has been nothing in the Minister's words at any stage to deny that. Indeed, it was only through cross-questioning that it was forced out of the Government that BREL was to be considered as one of the subsidiaries. Never has there been a commitment from the Minister that if he sold it he would sell it entirely.
Private enterprise started these works and placed them in strategic places, but that will be undone and the railway will be in a very ambiguous position. It will no longer be able to get the service that it now receives from BREL. Inevitably, if BREL becomes a private company its first 177 commitment will be to the company. Undoubtedly it will look more and more to exports. It will not want the small jobs in the maintenance schedules. Its work load will not be geared to British Rail maintenance interests.
5.15 pm
In the past, engines and carriagework have been built by private enterprise. Most of that work went overseas. Frequently the companies concerned did not want to know about British Railways. That is why private enterprise saw the wisdom of the present system. Yet the Minister is now turning his back on that and on all that he advocates in his philosophy. He is saying that that system is wrong and that he will prevent British Rail providing for its own needs. They will be placed in the hands of people whose interest is not guaranteed to serve British Rail. This will do a vast disservice to British Rail, quite apart from destroying jobs. Even if it were decided to sell these assets piecemeal, British Rail's costs would inevitably be higher if it sought to use its own engineering services, because the work would have to be taken longer distances than at present. That would inevitably raise the cost of the works retained by British Rail. As a result the works might have to close and there would eventually be a monopoly, which I assume the Minister is against. He believes in free enterprise. Yet British Rail would be held by that monopoly and could do nothing about it if this power were to remain in the Bill.
§ The Secretary of State for Transport (Mr. Norman Fowler)First, I appreciate the concern of the right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Booth) and the hon. Member for Newcastle Upon Tyne, Central (Mr. Cowans), which was also expressed in Committee.
I shall try to set out the background. The board's powers of disposal under clause 1(1) are deliberately drafted in general terms. They are not confined to specific subsidiaries because the Government and the board wish to open the way to the introduction of private capital into parts of the board's undertakings other than the four businesses mentioned if this first exercise is a success. We listed the first four businesses as Sealink, Hovercraft, hotels and non-operational property. But we think that it would be short-sighted to circumscribe the board's powers at this stage and so prevent it from taking opportunities which may later arise. It is on those grounds that we oppose the amendment.
There is nothing sinister in the potentially wide application of the powers in clause 1 or, indeed, the equivalent powers of direction in clause 3. The policy concerns the subsidiary companies of the railways. It does not concern the main rail system. Therefore, the suggestions that were made in Committee that this concerns the railway network are not valid. Moreover, the keystone of the Government's policy is our desire to provide in agreement with the board. Whatever other disagreement there may be between the two sides of the House it should be acknowledged that the Government have sought the agreement of the board. It is no secret that we have approached the problem from different points of view and have come to an agreement upon it. It is the board, operating through the holding company, British Rail Investments Ltd., which is taking the lead in making proposals and carrying them through. I would expect those proposals to take several forms.
§ Mr. BoothIn view of what the Minister has said about the Government seeking agreement with the board, will he 178 confirm that the board at no time suggested to him that it wanted an arrangement which would provide for the sale of BREL? That is the point of the amendment.
§ Mr. FowlerThe future of BREL is currently a matter of discussion between the Government and British Rail. The British Railways Board certainly wants improvements in British Rail engineering. frankly cannot remember at this stage whether we have discussed the issue of private investment. Certainly I think that there is nothing between us on the fact that we want improvements in British Rail engineering and in the company itself.
Perhaps I may develop the argument a little further. It is really the board operating through its holding company, British Rail Investment Ltd., which is taking the lead in making proposals and carrying them through.
I expect the proposals to take different forms. I do not want to constrain the board in any way in its opportunities to improve the performance of any part of the industry in which it is interested. The key which I invite the board to use is the attraction of private capital. We should consider whether that possibility could be usefully applied to BREL.
I want to discuss that with the board for several reasons. The first reason is that which the right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness gave—that BREL is a large business. It has 13 works scattered round the country and employs over 35,000 staff. In 1979 its turnover was £387 million. The bulk of the work is for the Railway Board, but some work is also done for overseas railways. BREL's work load is of two types—the new construction of locomotives, rolling stock and other railway equipment, using a significant proportion of bought-in parts from the private sector, and the heavy maintenance of locomotives and rolling stock.
BREL is unique among Western European railway equipment manufacturers in that it is owned by and has a near-monopoly of supply to its national railway. It seems reasonable for the Government to want to take a fundamental look at that arrangement in association with the Railways Board to see whether the present organisation of the industry can be improved and made more cost-effective in the board's interest, and whether as a major manufacturing industry it can play a bigger part in terms of exports and export orders.
The potential export market is enormous. However, without a strong and competitive home market United Kingdom manufacturers will continue to be at a disadvantage in a fiercely competitive international market. The opportunities for larger earnings and wider employment must not be ignored.
Nothing is more important than that we should contain the costs of the railway system so that we have the best and most cost-effective industry. There cannot be any doubt or debate about that. The issues are important and we are examining them.
Clearly the issues will require a great deal of thought. We want to examine ways of improving the opportunities for the whole railway equipment industry—not only BREL but the private sector manufacturers—so that they can compete in the home and overseas markets. For the board there could be advantages in an arrangement which effectively gives it alternative sources of supply from which it can choose the best buy. There could be questions 179 about the structure and funding of at least parts of BREL. That is where the powers in the Bill might be brought into play.
We must exchange views with the board. I give the House a categoric assurance that there is absolutely no question of having reached conclusions on the subject except about my objective, which is clear. It is to produce a stronger, more efficient and more prosperous industry with a larger effective market round the world, which I hope will be to the benefit of the Railway Board and of Britain's export performance.
I hope that the House will agree that it would be folly at this stage to close off the access of powers which could in some circumstances help to secure that objective. That would be the effect of the amendment, and I ask the House to reject it.
The right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness said that we had attempted to conceal our interest in giving BREL access to private investment. When I made my statement to the House last July, and in the exchanges which followed, I said that I would want to examine BREL's position. I repeated that on Second Reading and in Committee. There is no shift of policy. However, I emphasise that we have not come to conclusions.
The right hon. Gentleman asked about railway investment. I understand the concern about that. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will agree that that will benefit both BREL and the private sector. In that, as in all the other aspects of the Bill, we are trying to develop our policies in co-operation and agreement with the British Railways Board. I advise the House to reject the amendment. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman listened to my remarks and will be reassured by them.
§ Mr. StottI listened with interest to the Secretary of State. Later I shall criticise some of his remarks. We must place on record what the Opposition feel about the proposals generally. Since the Government were elected they have introduced legislation the purpose of which is to sell off the profitable parts of publicly owned and financed industries. In some cases they claim that they have a mandate from the electorate. In other cases we believe that they have no such mandate.
The Government are introducing legislation the effect of which is to rip-off the profitable parts of public enterprise, left, right and centre. I refer to British Aerospace, British Airways, British Telecommunications, the postal services and British Rail subsidiaries. The language used is always the same. In the last two years we have examined legislation containing sweeping enabling powers. Powers are being given to Secretaries of State which were hitherto unknown.
The Telecommunications Bill states:
The Secretary of State may, after consultation with the Corporation, direct the Corporation—(a) to dispose of any part of its undertaking and any assets held by it.The largest business in Europe is being dictated to by the Secretary of State for Industry.This Bill states:
The Secretary of State may, after consultation with the Railways Board, give directions to the Board requiring them … to exercise their powers under section 1 of this Act".That clause contains provision for the board to divest itself of profitable assets.180 We have argued long and hard against the Bill's provisions. We do not see any point in selling off valuable assets when British Rail needs a massive injection of public funds to sustain its rail network.
The Government may claim that the subsidiaries in question are somewhat peripheral to British Rail's main business. We reject that. Hotels, ships, hovercraft and ports are essential elements in an integrated transport system. Another subsidiary, British Rail Engineering Ltd. is the subject of this Bill. In Committee we tabled amendments to protect the named subsidiaries. However, if this Bill is enacted the Secretary of State will have the power to instruct British Rail to sell parts of BREL. He will not have to make any reference to Parliament other than, perhaps, a statement of his intentions.
5.30 pm
The Secretary of State cannot say that BREL is peripheral to British Rail's business. BREL is an integral part of the business of British Rail. Its work force, including those in my constituency who work at the Horwich plant, are members of the railway family. It is inconceivable that one of the world's finest and largest railway businesses should find itself denuded of its engineering workshops by ministerial proclamation. This amendment is an attempt to prevent the Secretary of State from doing that.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Booth) outlined the general performance of BREL. This year's annual report and accounts make clear that BREL is a profitable organisation, which contributes immensely to the well-being of the main rail network. As the Secretary of State pointed out, last year its gross income was £387 million. BREL has 13 workshops. As my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne, Central (Mr. Cowans) said, the plants are strategically placed throughout the regions and employ 36,236 people. The company has a fine record of productivity and of an interface with the main rail network. Therefore, the importance of BREL to British Rail's overall position is clear.
I accompanied my right hon. Friend the Member for Barrow-in-Furness to BREL workshops in Horwich, in my constituency. About 2,500 people are employed there. I venture to suggest that most of them voted for me. Therefore, I feel, with some pride, that I may speak on their behalf. As my right hon. Friend said, that company has one of the most modern foundries in the world. Productivity is good and the work force is keen to win business and to do a good job. Castings at the Horwich foundry could amount to as much as 42,000 tonnes per annum.
The Secretary of State could issue a diktat to the British Rail Board to the effect that it should sell part of British Rail Engineering Ltd. Throughout our debates in Committee the Secretary of State and the Minister implied that the Government would prefer to sell the subsidiaries as a whole. What will happen to the 13 companies that comprise BREL? If they are sold off as a package and are frightened, at least two—and perhaps three—of those under private ownership will close almost immediately.
I have it on good authority for the manager of BREL at Horwich, Mr. Christopher Shepherd, that if BREL were to be sold to private enterprise British Rail's main line business would suffer. Private enterprise would not be able to cope with the orders. BREL has a low unit cost output 181 to British Rail. It manages to cater for the peaks and troughs of the business. If that integral part of British Rail were sold to private enterprise simply in order to satisfy some prejudiced view, it would only prove detrimental to British Rail. Therefore, BREL should not be included in the Bill and should not be considered for sale. That is why we have tabled the amendment.
§ Mr. ParrisWill the hon. Gentleman explain why, under private ownership, BREL would be unable to do what it now does under public ownership?
§ Mr. StottI do not wish to go into detail, because we are under a guillotine and other important amendments must be considered. However, my right hon. Friend and I visited BREL on Friday. We discussed this matter thoroughly with the manager for more than an hour. Having listened to his remarks, we are convinced that if BREL were sold to the private sector it would not be able to cope with the demand that British Rail places on its engineering workshops. Even today, BREL is suffering because it cannot get the parts that it requires from private enterprise. That is one of its main bones of contention.
§ Mr. CowansSurely the answer is that BREL is an integral part of the business of British Rail. The Minister emphasised exports, but not maintenence. If the Secretary of State sold BREL it would be like a bicycle dealer with a small repair shop and staff, sacking his staff, selling the stock and hoping that someone else would supply him so that he could repay the bank. If BREL was sold to private enterprise, maintenance would not be the private firms's major concern. It would be able to diversify and do other things. However, at present BREL is an integral part of the railway industry and is geared to meeting the needs of British Rail. It exports when it has the capacity to do so.
§ Mr. StottI am grateful to my hon. Friend for that point. He has spent all his life in the railway industry and speaks with great authority in the House. I cannot add to or detract from anything that he said. However, the Government may wish to pursue their doctrinal approach and their war of attrition against publicly owned enterprises. They may claim that they have a mandate to do so. They may even claim that that is the wish of the majority. So be it. BREL was not one of the named subsidiaries that was dealt with in Committee. Nevertheless, the Bill would enable the Secretary of State to trigger off the mechanism that would enable him to sell BREL. We have tabled an amendment to prevent him from doing that.
If the Secretary of State wishes to sell BREL he should come before the House with another Bill and argue his corner. He should not have sleeping powers that could be used at a future date. We have never seen the like of such powers before. This Secretary of State and many others hold enabling powers to flog off almost the entire public sector. We have had enough of that. That is why we have tabled the amendment and that is why we shall divide the House.
§ Question put, That the amendment be made:—
§ The House divided: Ayes 227, Noes 287.
185| Division No. 155] | [5.39 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abse, Leo | Archer, Rt Hon Peter |
| Adams, Allen | Ashley, Rt Hon Jack |
| Allaun, Frank | Ashton, Joe |
| Alton, David | Atkinson, N. (H'gey,) |
| Anderson, Donald | Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) |
| Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) | Grant, George (Morpeth) |
| Beith, A. J. | Grant, John (Islington C) |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Grimond, Rt Hon J. |
| Booth, Rt Hon Albert | Hamilton, W. W. (C'tral Fife) |
| Boothroyd, Miss Betty | Hardy, Peter |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon A.(M'b'ro) | Harrison, Rt Hon Walter |
| Bradley, Tom | Hart, Rt Hon Dame Judith |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy |
| Brocklebank-Fowler, C. | Haynes, Frank |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | Healey, Rt Hon Denis |
| Brown, R. C. (N'castle W) | Heffer, Eric S. |
| Brown, Ronald W. (H'ckn'y S) | Hogg, N. (E Dunb't'nshire) |
| Buchan, Norman | Home Robertson, John |
| Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) | Homewood, William |
| Campbell, Ian | Hooley, Frank |
| Campbell-Savours, Dale | Howells, Geraint |
| Canavan, Dennis | Hughes, Mark (Durham) |
| Cant, R. B. | Hughes, Roy (Newport) |
| Carmichael, Neil | Janner, Hon Greville |
| Carter-Jones, Lewis | Jay, Rt Hon Douglas |
| Clark, Dr David (S Shields) | John, Brynmor |
| Cocks, Rt Hon M. (B'stol S) | Johnson, James (Hull West) |
| Cohen, Stanley | Johnston, Russell (Inverness) |
| Concannon, Rt Hon J. D. | Jones, Barry (East Flint) |
| Cook, Robin F. | Jones, Dan (Burnley) |
| Cowans, Harry | Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald |
| Cox, T. (W'dsw'th, Toot'g) | Kerr, Russell |
| Craigen, J. M. | Lambie, David |
| Crowther, J. S. | Lamborn, Harry |
| Cryer, Bob | Lamond, James |
| Cunliffe, Lawrence | Leighton, Ronald |
| Cunningham, G. (Islington S) | Lestor, Miss Joan |
| Cunningham, Dr J. (W'h'n) | Lewis, Arthur (N'ham NW) |
| Davidson, Arthur | Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) |
| Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (L'lli) | Litherland, Robert |
| Davies, Ifor (Gower) | Lofthouse, Geoffrey |
| Davis, Clinton (Hackney C) | Lyon, Alexander (York) |
| Davis, T. (B'ham, Stechf'd) | Lyons, Edward (Bradf'd W) |
| Deakins, Eric | McDonald, Dr Oonagh |
| Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) | McElhone, Frank |
| Dempsey, James | McGuire, Michael (Ince) |
| Dewar, Donald | McKay, Allen (Penistone) |
| Dixon, Donald | McKelvey, William |
| Dobson, Frank | MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor |
| Dormand, Jack | McMahon, Andrew |
| Douglas-Mann, Bruce | McNally, Thomas |
| Dubs, Alfred | McNamara, Kevin |
| Duffy, A. E. P. | McTaggart, Robert |
| Dunn, James A. | McWilliam, John |
| Dunnett, Jack | Magee, Bryan |
| Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. | Marks, Kenneth |
| Eadie, Alex | Marshall, D (G'gow S'ton) |
| Eastham, Ken | Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) |
| Edwards, R. (W'hampt'n S E) | Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) |
| Ellis, R. (NE D'bysh're) | Martin, M (G'gow S'burn) |
| English, Michael | Mason, Rt Hon Roy |
| Ennals, Rt Hon David | Mellish, Rt Hon Robert |
| Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) | Millan, Rt Hon Bruce |
| Evans, John (Newton) | Miller, Dr M. S. (E Kilbride) |
| Field, Frank | Mitchell, Austin (Grimsby) |
| Fitch, Alan | Mitchell, R. C. (Soton Itchen) |
| Fitt, Gerard | Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) |
| Flannery, Martin | Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) |
| Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) | Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon) |
| Foot, Rt Hon Michael | Morton, George |
| Ford, Ben | Moyle, Rt Hon Roland |
| Forrester, John | Newens, Stanley |
| Foster, Derek | Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon |
| Foulkes, George | Ogden, Eric |
| Fraser, J. (Lamb'th, N'w'd) | O'Halloran, Michael |
| Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald | O'Neill, Martin |
| Freud, Clement | Owen, Rt Hon Dr David |
| Garrett, John (Norwich S) | Palmer, Arthur |
| Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend) | Parker, John |
| George, Bruce | Parry, Robert |
| Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John | Pavitt, Laurie |
| Ginsburg, David | Pendry, Tom |
| Golding, John | Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) |
| Gourlay, Harry | Prescott, John |
| Graham, Ted | Price, C. (Lewisham W) |
| Race, Reg | Stoddart, David |
| Radice, Giles | Stott, Roger |
| Rees, Rt Hon M (Leeds S) | Straw, Jack |
| Richardson, Jo | Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley |
| Roberts, Albert (Normanton) | Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth) |
| Roberts, Allan (Bootle) | Thorne, Stan (Preston South) |
| Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) | Tilley, John |
| Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock) | Tinn, James |
| Robertson, George | Torney, Tom |
| Robinson, G. (Coventry NW) | Urwin, Rt Hon Tom |
| Rooker, J. W. | Wainwright, E. (Dearne V) |
| Roper, John | Watkins, David |
| Ross, Ernest (Dundee West) | Weetch, Ken |
| Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) | Welsh, Michael |
| Rowlands, Ted | White, Frank R. |
| Ryman, John | White, J. (G'gow Pollok) |
| Sandelson, Neville | Whitlock, William |
| Sever, John | Wigley, Dafydd |
| Sheerman, Barry | Willey, Rt Hon Frederick |
| Shore, Rt Hon Peter | Williams, Sir J.(W'ton) |
| Short, Mrs Renée | Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E) |
| Silkin, Rt Hon J. (Deptford) | Wilson, William (C'try SE) |
| Skinner, Dennis | Winnick, David |
| Smith, Rt Hon J. (N Lanark) | Woodall, Alec |
| Snape, Peter | Woolmer, Kenneth |
| Soley, Clive | Young, David (Bolton E) |
| Spearing, Nigel | |
| Spriggs, Leslie | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Stallard, A. W. | Mr. Donald Coleman and Mr. James Hamilton. |
| Steel, Rt Hon David | |
| Stewart, Rt Hon D. (W Isles) |
| NOES | |
| Adley, Robert | Channon, Rt. Hon. Paul |
| Aitken, Jonathan | Chapman, Sydney |
| Alexander, Richard | Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th, S'n) |
| Alison, Michael | Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) |
| Amery, Rt Hon Julian | Clegg, Sir Walter |
| Ancram, Michael | Cockeram, Eric |
| Arnold, Tom | Colvin, Michael |
| Aspinwall, Jack | Cope, John |
| Atkins, Robert (Preston N) | Cormack, Patrick |
| Atkinson, David (B'm'th, E) | Corrie, John |
| Banks, Robert | Costain, Sir Albert |
| Beaumont-Dark, Anthony | Cranborne, Viscount |
| Bell, Sir Ronald | Critchley, Julian |
| Bendall, Vivian | Dean, Paul (North Somerset) |
| Benyon, Thomas (A'don) | Dickens, Geoffrey |
| Benyon, W. (Buckingham) | Dorrell, Stephen |
| Best, Keith | Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. |
| Bevan, David Gilroy | Dover, Denshore |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | du Cann, Rt Hon Edward |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Dunn, Robert (Dartford) |
| Blackburn, John | Durant, Tony |
| Blaker, Peter | Dykes, Hugh |
| Body, Richard | Eden, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Eggar, Tim |
| Boscawen, Hon Robert | Elliott, Sir William |
| Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) | Emery, Peter |
| Bowden, Andrew | Evans, John (Newton) |
| Boyson, Dr Rhodes | Eyre, Reginald |
| Braine, Sir Bernard | Fairbairn, Nicholas |
| Bright, Graham | Fairgrieve, Russell |
| Brinton, Tim | Faith, Mrs Sheila |
| Brittan, Leon | Farr, John |
| Brotherton, Michael | Fenner, Mrs Peggy |
| Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'n) | Finsberg, Geoffrey |
| Browne, John (Winchester) | Fisher, Sir Nigel |
| Bruce-Gardyne, John | Fletcher, A. (Ed'nb'gh N) |
| Bryan, Sir Paul | Fletcher-Cooke, Sir Charles |
| Buchanan-Smith, Alick | Fookes, Miss Janet |
| Buck, Antony | Forman, Nigel |
| Budgen, Nick | Fowler, Rt Hon Norman |
| Burden, Sir Frederick | Fox, Marcus |
| Butcher, John | Fraser, Peter (South Angus) |
| Butler, Hon Adam | Fry, Peter |
| Cadbury, Jocelyn | Galbraith, Hon T. G. D. |
| Carlisle, John (Luton West) | Gardiner, George (Reigate) |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Garel-Jones, Tristan |
| Chalker, Mrs. Lynda | Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian |
| Glyn, Dr Alan | Mellor, David |
| Goodhart, Philip | Meyer, Sir Anthony |
| Goodlad, Alastair | Miller, Hal (B'grove) |
| Gorst, John | Mills, Iain (Meriden) |
| Gow, Ian | Mills, Peter (West Devon) |
| Gower, Sir Raymond | Miscampbell, Norman |
| Grant, Anthony (Harrow C) | Moate, Roger |
| Gray, Hamish | Monro, Hector |
| Grieve, Percy | Montgomery, Fergus |
| Griffiths, E. (B'y St. Edm'ds) | Moore, John |
| Griffiths, Peter Portsm'th N) | Morris, M. (N'hampton S) |
| Grist, Ian | Morrison, Hon P. (Chester) |
| Grylls, Michael | Mudd, David |
| Gummer, John Selwyn | Murphy, Christopher |
| Hamilton, Hon A. | Myles, David |
| Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) | Neale, Gerrard |
| Hampson, Dr Keith | Nelson, Anthony |
| Hannam, John | Neubert, Michael |
| Haselhurst, Alan | Newton, Tony |
| Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael | Normanton, Tom |
| Hawkins, Paul | Onslow, Cranley |
| Hawksley, Warren | Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S. |
| Hayhoe, Barney | Osborn, John |
| Heddle, John | Page, Rt Hon Sir G. (Crosby) |
| Henderson, Barry | Page, Richard (SW Herts) |
| Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L. | Parkinson, Cecil |
| Hill, James | Parris, Matthew |
| Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) | Patten, Christopher (Bath) |
| Holland, Philip (Carlton) | Patten, John (Oxford) |
| Hooson, Tom | Pattie, Geoffrey |
| Hordern, Peter | Pawsey, James |
| Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey | Percival, Sir Ian |
| Howell, Ralph (N Norfolk) | Pollock, Alexander |
| Hunt, David (Wirral) | Porter, Barry |
| Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) | Prentice, Rt Hon Reg |
| Hurd, Hon Douglas | Price, Sir David (Eastleigh) |
| Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) | Proctor, K. Harvey |
| Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick | Pym, Rt Hon Francis |
| Jessel, Toby | Raison, Timothy |
| Johnson Smith, Geoffrey | Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal) |
| Jopling, Rt Hon Michael | Rees-Davies, W. R. |
| Kershaw, Anthony | Renton, Tim |
| Kimball, Marcus | Rhodes James, Robert |
| King, Rt Hon Tom | Rifkind, Malcolm |
| Kitson, Sir Timothy | Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey |
| Knox, David | Roberts, M. (Cardiff NW) |
| Lamont, Norman | Roberts, Wyn (Conway) |
| Lang, Ian | Rossi, Hugh |
| Langford-Holt, Sir John | Rost, Peter |
| Lawrence, Ivan | Sainsbury, Hon Timothy |
| Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel | St. John-Stevas, Rt Hon N. |
| Lee, John | Scott, Nicholas |
| Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark | Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) |
| Lester, Jim (Beeston) | Shaw, Michael (Scarborough) |
| Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) | Shelton, William (Streatham) |
| Lloyd, Ian (Havant & W'loo) | Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) |
| Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) | Shepherd, Richard |
| Loveridge, John | Shersby, Michael |
| Luce, Richard | Silvester, Fred |
| Lyell, Nicholas | Sims, Roger |
| McCrindle, Robert | Skeet, T. H. H. |
| Macfarlane, Neil | Smith, Dudley |
| MacGregor, John | Speller, Tony |
| MacKay, John (Argyll) | Spence, John |
| Macmillan, Rt Hon M. | Spicer, Jim (West Dorset) |
| McNair-Wilson, M. (N'bury) | Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) |
| McNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st) | Sproat, Iain |
| McQuarrie, Albert | Stainton, Keith |
| Madel, David | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Major, John | Stanley, John |
| Marland, Paul | Stevens, Martin |
| Marlow, Tony | Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) |
| Marten, Neil (Banbury) | Stewart, A. (E Renfrewshire) |
| Mates, Michael | Stokes, John |
| Mather, Carol | Stradling Thomas, J. |
| Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus | Tapsell, Peter |
| Mawby, Ray | Taylor, Robert (Croydon NW) |
| Mawhinney, Dr Brian | Taylor, Teddy (S'end E) |
| Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin | Tebbit, Norman |
| Mayhew, Patrick | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| Thomas, Rt Hon Peter | Waddington, David |
| Thompson, Donald | Wakeham, John |
| Thorne, Neil (Ilford South) | Walker, Rt Hon P.(W'cester) |
| Thornton, Malcolm | Walker, B. (Perth ) |
| Tilley, John | Walker-Smith, Rt Hon Sir D. |
| Townend, John (Bridlington) | Wall, Patrick |
| Townsend, Cyril D, (B'heath) | Waller, Gary |
| Trippier, David | Walters, Dennis |
| Trotter, Neville | Ward, John |
| van Straubenzee, W. R. | Watson, John |
| Vaughan, Dr Gerard | Wells, John (Maidstone) |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
187§ Mr. BoothI beg to move amendment No. 3, in page 2, line 5, at end insert—
'(3) Where by consent of the Secretary of State under section 1(2) or by direction of the Secretary of State under section 3(1) British Railways sell more than 50 per cent. of the shares in any one of their subsidiaries, British Railways shall not be held to be in control of that subsidiary for the purpose of public sector control of British Railways External Financing Limit.'.The purpose of the amendment is to prevent any British Rail subsidiary from being maintained within an external financing limit set by the Government after 51 per cent. or more of the shares in that subsidiary have been sold. The external financing limit control on many nationalised industries has been a cause of grave concern and a cause of problems. It has made it almost impossible to plan an effective investment programme.This concern has been expressed recently by the TUC nationalised industries committee, and previously by the chairmen of the nationalised industries, who have set up a study group which has considered different ways of financing nationalised industries.
On amendment No. 1 the Secretary of State chose to stress that he was seeking to proceed, as far as possible, by agreement with the British Railways Board. Therefore, it is my judgment, from the information that I have from those running the subsidiaries of British Railways, that there is no possibility of proceeding by agreement if the Secretary of State is to insist on keeping those subsidiaries under an external financing limit set by the Government after they sold 51 per cent. or more of their shares.
The basic reason why some members of the management of British Rail subsidiaries have gone along with the idea of privatisation is that they believed that it was the only way open to them to escape from what they thought were the impossibly tight limits being set for them by the Government under the external financing limit arrangement.
The major aim, therefore, of the British Railways Board, in dealing with the four named subsidiaries—when they agreed with the Government that it would be worth while, if there were no other way to get outside the external financing limit, to sell a private interest in the subsidiaries—was to escape that form of control. I believe that they were led to understand, or were caused to understand, that in order to escape the external financing limits, which they thought were impossibly inhibiting the development of their businesses, they would, first, have to operate without public sector guarantees. That was made clear to them and I think they understood it.
They understood that they would be unable to retain a majority of the directorship of a subsidiary if they were to be outwith external financing limits. They also understood that any contracts that existed between British Railways and a subsidiary once it had been sold off to the extent of 51 per cent. or more would have to be contracts that were in such a form that there would be clearly defined liabilities as between British Railways and their ex-subsidiaries. I say [...] because we are talking about subsidiaries in a way that would not be recognised by the definition of "subsidiary" under the Companies Act. Clearly, these bodies will be more than 51 per cent. privately owned and, therefore, not subsidiaries in the normal sense of the word.
However, since the Bill has commenced its proceedings through the House there have been growing suspicions, confirmed in Committee, that the Government are going 188 to set much tighter limits upon the sale of British Railways' subsidiaries before they will release them from the external financing limit.
In Committee, when we probed this matter, the Under-Secretary made it clear that it would not be enough for them to sell 51 per cent. and, when we pressed him further, that it might not be enough for them to sell 60 per cent., or sometimes even 70 per cent. He said it depended upon how the shares were distributed, and it would also depend upon the British Railways Board being able to demonstrate that it had virtually lost all control or influence in the running of a subsidiary before it might be released from the external financing limit.
British Rail is so urgently in need of money that it may already have spent considerable money and management time in seeking to arrange sales of its subsidiaries on assumptions that it quite fairly made about the nature of this legislation—assumptions that have now proved to be wrong. The only way to underline the justifiable case that BR subsidiaries, or ex-subsidiaries, should be able to operate outside the EFL is by agreeing to the amendment.
As it is at the moment, the subsidiaries compete with one another and with the board for the limited amount that is available in borrowing to British Railways. If a subsidiary borrows £50 million more for investment, that is £50 million less for the main board to invest in main line operations. They compete with one another, they compete with the board, and they are desperate for access to outside capital.
If the Government insist that the conditions of having access to outside capital is that British Railways must sell off some part, or even a majority holding, it is only reasonable that they should be allowed to proceed with that development in the same way as any private business would be allowed to proceed with a development had it sold out a 51 per cent. holding in part of its operation. It would be free to develop its loan arrangements with the agreement of the 51 per cent. or more of its private shareholders, or such directors as they had elected.
Unless this is carried out, what we are engaged in in the Bill is little more than a public asset-stripping operation that will not assist the British Railways Board or its subsidiaries in any way whatsoever, and can aid only those who have been enabled to buy in on extremely favourable terms—terms that could be achieved only because the British Railways Board has been hog-tied in its arrangements.
In the remaining 30 minutes it is impossible to try to debate intelligently all the outstanding important amendments that are to be dealt with under the guillotine motion. Therefore, it is not my intention to press the matter to a vote—not that my hon. Friends and I do not feel very strongly about it; we feel extremely strongly, but we feel that it would be quite wrong to spend a quarter of an hour in Division time that would prevent our going on to one more of the important issues in view of the impossible constraints set upon us by the guillotine.
§ 6 pm
§ Mr. Peter Snape (West Bromwich, East)I shall be brief because, like my right hon. Friend, I wish to say a word on the next amendment. It seems to me that the Government's case, as they will put it forward in rejecting the amendment, will be their general argument that a majority private stake is necessary to permit investment in the subsidiaries to escape the PSBR net and a more specific 189 argument in relation to Sealink, which I hope we shall deal with later, namely, that a successful flotation of shares can occur only with a minority BR holding or, indeed, with none at all.
One thing that puzzles my union—the National Union of Railwaymen—and that also puzzles the chairmen of the British Railways Board—and, I have no doubt, other members of the board—is the difference in the way that BR subsidiaries are being treated in terms of PSBR compared to other publicly owned industries—for example, British Airways. I mention Sir Peter Parker deliberately because, of course, not only is that gentleman the chairman of the British Railways Board; he serves on the board of British Airways, and I hope that when the right hon. Gentleman replies to the amendment he will do something to dispel the aura of mystery and doubt in Sir Peter Parker's mind as well as assuring Opposition Members that he knows what he is doing.
When the Civil Aviation Bill was debated in the House on 19 November 1979 the key sentence, in col. 39–40 of Hansard, in terms of British Airways, was:
the airline will no longer be subject to statutory financial targets, nor will it be subject to cash limits."—[Official Report, 19 November 1979; Vol. 974, c. 39–40.]As a railwayman, I have to say that if it is good enough for British Airways it is good enough for us, and the air of mystery that the right hon. Gentleman and his hon. and learned Friend the Under-Secretary have created in respect of this aspect of the Bill concerns us all.
§ Mr. FowlerThe amendment relates to an issue that we discussed extensively in Committee. What we have sought to explain to hon. Gentlemen and to the right hon. Gentleman is why it is necessary for the British Railways Board to relinquish effective control over its subsidiaries if these businesses are to enjoy the full freedom of the private sector and if their borrowing and investment is no longer to count against the board's external financing limit and investment ceiling.
The object of the whole exercise is to seek to transfer these businesses to the private sector, where they can be free of the existing constraints of the public sector. There are two stages in this process. Once the board no longer holds the majority of shares in a business and can no longer control the composition of its board of directors, the company will cease to be a subsidiary within the meaning of the Transport Acts and the statutory controls in those Acts will no longer apply to it.
However, even where the board holds a minority of the shares it is possible in some circumstances, depending on the distribution of the other shareholdings and the trading relationship, if any, between the board and the company, that the board would be able to exercise de facto control over the company, and in that case the company would still be classified to the public sector and its borrowing and investment would still be controlled by the board's external financing limit and investment ceiling. Also, of course, its borrowing would continue to count against the PSBR.
The question whether the board is still exercising effective control of a company, has to be determined basically upon the facts of the particular case. The purpose of the amendment is to short-circuit this process by statutory means; in other words, to provide that once a board ceases to hold a majority of the shares in a business it shall no longer be deemed to control it, no matter what the reality of the situation is. Frankly, I do not think that 190 will do, because it is based upon the misconception of the nature and the purpose of the PSBR. The point is that the Government or Parliament: cannot merely decide what shall and shall not be held to count against the PSBR; that is a practical and factual definition, and markets will certainly start to look beyond the so-called definition and to the real facts of the matter, and they will start taking their own view of who is and who is not effectively borrowing on the Government's credit. That is the important point.
After all, the nationalised industries effectively rely upon Government credit, and we are seeking to do something genuine—not to issue what is in fact a disguised form of gilts but to produce genuine private risk capital.
However hard the Government try to pretend that the PSBR is defined in one way, the markets will see the truth of the matter, as markets tend to do. Interest rates or inflation cannot be altered just by juggling with the words. The external financing limit was not introduced by this Government; it was introduced by the Labour Government of which the right hon. Gentleman was a member, and the rules on what counts against the EFL and against the PSBR are common to the previous Administration and to this one.
The right hon. Member for Barrow-in-Furness (Mr. Booth) suggested that there was some misunderstanding of the position within British Rail. He thinks that British Rail has been misled, or is misled, about the position. In fact, the chairman of British Rail Investments, who, as I explained earlier, is the chairman of the holding company under the board, set out very clearly to the Rail Council the issues that are involved.
He told the Rail Council that the two basic criteria for deciding whether an economic unit is in or out of the public sector are, basically, control and ownership, and that there had to be convincing evidence that the public sector had permanently given up control over board aspects of policy, such as capital investment and borrowing and pricing, before the business in question could be classified as being in the private sector. There is no hint of misunderstanding about that situation.
The chairman then said that if British Rail retained 50 per cent. or more of the shares it would clearly be able to exercise control of the board of directors and, hence, would not satisfy the requirement that control must pass. He made the distinction—it is a distinction for which the hon. Member for West Bromwich, East (Mr. Snare) asked—between that situation and the situation of British Airways or the British Transport Docks Board. The situation with the docks board or with British Airways is that what we are talking about is a Government shareholding.
It is one thing for the Government to say that they are not going to exercise control; it is another thing, with a 50 per cent. stake, for a nationalised industry to say that. That is the essential difference. But Mr. Bosworth, the chairman of British Rail Investments, went on to put exactly the point of the amendment. He said, "Suppose now that we retain 49 per cent. of the share capital. Although we could in theory be outvoted, the practical likelihood of that happening is very small. It is likely, therefore, that the Treasury would regard this not as a true surrender of control but, rather, as a device to evade the rule."
§ Mr. BoothWill the Secretary of State accept that what the board initially discussed with him was not ways in which it might surrender control? It was not interested in that. It was interested in ways in which it might get out with the EFL and relieve itself of a massive financial problem. It has never declared itself in favour of forfeiting control for the sake of doing that.
§ Mr. FowlerOn several occasions I have tried to explain the matter to the right hon. Gentleman. He is fundamentally wrong. He is simply not accurate in his understanding of the British Railways Board provision. At the time that I made the statement the board knew perfectly well—I did seek to explain the position in Committee and in reply to the agreed questions that were to follow in the House of Commons—that if the business was to escape public sector controls and go into the private sector, control had to pass. That has always been understood by the chairman of British Rail. No purpose is served by the right hon. Gentleman's continuing to put the point and say that it was not understood by them.
Further, the chairman of British Rail Investments, which holds the subsidiary companies, has now set out the position to the rail unions. It is that position that I am seeking to summarise. It completely demolishes the right hon. Gentlemen's argument that no one understands the position.
§ Mr. SnapeIf the right hon. Gentleman will not accept what my right hon. Friend says, will he accept from me that at a meeting between the British Railways Board and the NUR within the last year—a meeting at which I happened to be present—senior officers of the board assured my union—the major union in the railway business—that a holding of approximately 30 per cent. would be sufficient to retain control of these subsidiaries. Will he take that from me? That is what they told us.
§ Mr. FowlerI take what the hon. Gentleman says as stating the facts of the situation and of the meeting that he attended, but the point is that I am sure that there was no misunderstanding of the position at the time the agreement was reached between the Government and the board. I emphasise that we came to this situation from different points, as the hon. Gentleman, with his knowledge of the railway industry, knows. There was negotiation, we sought to reach agreement, and we reached agreement.
What was basic to that agreement was that in order for a business—or part of a business—to go from the public sector and gain the advantages of the private sector, control had to pass.
Mr. Bosworth's statement of the situation is an outstanding statement, made directly to the Rail Council and to the rail unions. It is by far the clearest statement that has ever been made on this subject. Mr. Bosworth said:
As the retained shareholding becomes less, the strength of an argument that we really have abandoned effective control becomes greater. At 40 per cent., for example, there must be quite a strong likelihood that the BRB could be outvoted if most of the other shareholders so desired, and provided that we were not seeking to exercise control in other, more subtle ways, it is hoped that the Treasury might be convinced that we really had surrendered effective control.He went on:Thus our aim must be to enable the businesses to escape from the PSBR and this means surrendering effective control. At the same time, where practicable we want to retain a continuing stake in the businesses, and a voice in their affairs, and we shall need to ensure that future railway requirements are fully safeguarded.192 The right hon. Gentleman asked when it was said. It was said in March, at a meeting of the Rail Council.
§ Mr. FowlerCertainly it was long after Second Reading; there is no dispute about that. But there is considerable dispute if the right hon. Gentleman seeks to say that there is a misunderstanding about the position now. There is certainly no misunderstanding on the part of the board and I hope that there is no misunderstanding on the part of the unions. Everyone has been open about the position. Basically, it means that control must pass. But of course it also means that the British Railways Board can keep a substantial stake, if that is its desire, in the new company that is so formed.
I hope that with that account of the situation the right hon. Gentleman will ask leave to withdraw the amendment.
§ Amendment negatived.
§ Mr. BoothI beg to move amendment No. 4, in page 3, line 36, at end insert
'Where any matter concerning the sale of a British Railways subsidiary has been referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission the Secretary of State shall not direct the Board to sell this subsidiary, or part of it, if he has refused consent for a sale or a merger by British Railways of another subsidiary operating a competing service'.The object of the amendment is to prevent the Government from forcing the British Railways Board to sell a subsidiary that has been referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission where the Government have refused the board consent to sell or merge a subsidiary that is running a competing service. By the time the Bill has been enacted at least two British Railways Board subsidiaries could be affected by the amendment. British Rail's work on a merger proposal for Seaspeed Hovercraft Services is currently delayed by a Government decision to refer its merger proposal to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission—a delay that may make it extremely difficult for it to carry through its financial plans for its hovercraft services, at least for the next couple of years.In the case of Sealink—British Rail's shipping and ferry service—the board is working to achieve a profitable position again, following a very hard year in 1980, when few people made a profit from operating in the Channel. It has had a proposed bid by European Ferries—the company chaired by the hon. Member for Dorking (Mr. Wickenden)—referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission before a bid has even been considered by the British Railways Board—in fact, even before a detailed bid has been received.
The Government, by these two references, have certainly raised the fear that they will force British Rail to sell Sealink—providing that is cleared by the Monopolies and Mergers Commission—and hold up the development of British Rail's own plans for the merger of British Hovercraft Services in order that whoever privately owns Sealink will be in a strong position to monopolise cross-Channel services. To force British Rail to sell Sealink at this time would virtually ensure a distress sale. There is no doubt that the few profitable years before 1980 would mean that it would take a year or two to put itself back into a profitable position in which it could consider reasonable bids.
193 Furthermore, it will take time for British Rail to get its new ferries into operation—ferries, incidentally, that were built in British shipyards; we have no certainty that ferries built by a privately owned Sealink will be ordered from British shipyards—and to bring the service up to its full profitability and be the best saleable proposition.
British Rail needs to know—I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will tell us tonight—when the Secretary of State will clear its proposal for hovercraft, whether that service will be in the Channel, and under what arrangements.
Without such a safeguard against a Channel monopoly we could be in a situation in which there will be a private monopoly on the Channel, with no public holding whatsoever. It could be completely sold out, with no guarantee of maintaining the cross-Channel link between the railway networks of this country and of France. These are my grounds for moving the amendment.
§ Mr. SnapeIt is true that on most clauses there is a wide ideological gulf between the Government and the Opposition, but it is equally true that the Government have valid reasons for advancing their proposals in other clauses. In a previous amendment the right hon. Member pointed out that as his party regarded competition as the be-all and end-all for British Railways engineering, and as private enterprise should be allowed to compete in these markets, the Conservative Party, having stood for enterprise and competition, was justified in its proposals.
I hope that the right hon. Gentleman is prepared to eat his words on this clause. He knows that if the Monopolies and Mergers Commission decides to allow the European Ferries bid for Sealink to go ahead one private company will control about 80 per cent. of the total cross-Channel traffic. The competition that exists at present between Sealink and European Ferries will be dead. The advertisements for European Ferries that are to be seen on television represent competition that arose only fairly recently. Six or seven years ago the English Channel was widely regarded as the most expensive stretch of water in the world. Over the past few years there has been intense competition for the available traffic, and fares have fallen dramatically. No one believes that that dramatic fall in fares will continue if European Ferries is allowed a virtual monopoly of the cross-Channel services, which is what it will get.
My right hon. Friend rightly stated that Sealink has an honourable record in having its ships built in the United Kingdom. Over the past 20 years, of Sealink's 32 vessels currently in operation no fewer than 21 have been built in British shipyards. As to the competition, which does not look as if it will last much longer, European Ferries has never once placed an order with Harland and Wolff. I am surprised that some of our Ulster neighbours, who always protest that they are concerned about prospects in Northern Ireland, are not here to support the Opposition in this matter.
During its entire history European Ferries has never placed an order with Harland and Wolff. Lloyd's Register of Shipping shows that European Ferries has ordered no vessels from United Kingdom shipyards in the past 10 years. Over the past decade it has placed its orders with West Germany, Holland and Denmark.
The Townsend car ferries vessel, which so proudly entered Cherbourg during last summer, during the French fishermen's blockade, playing "Land of Hope and 194 Glory"—"Viking Venturer"—was built in Aalborg, in Denmark. The ship that immediately followed it into that port, also playing "Land of Hope and Glory" was built in Bremerhaven; so perhaps "Deutscheland Uber Alles" would have been a better anthem for that ship to play.
We all know the reasons behind the Government's very fast referral of this bid to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission. As our Sunday colour supplements tell us every week, the Prime Minister is a great admirer of the hon. Member for Dorking (Mr. Wickenden). It is not surprising that the right hon. Lady should be a great admirer of that hon. Gentleman because, unlike the majority of Conservative Members, the hon. Member for Dorking has actually worked for his living. The Conservative Party professes to be the party of business, but business experience appears to be remarkably lacking in many Conservative Members. The Prime Minister has expressed her admiration for the hon. Member for Dorking and her desire to see his success amply rewarded. The fact that his success in private enterprise should be rewarded by the plundering—I choose my word carefully—of one of the State's assets is little short of disgraceful.
Those of us who were here in the last Parliament well remember legislation such as the Aircraft and Shipbuilding Industries Bill, when we fought long and hard throughout the night to preserve these assets on behalf of the State. We were then told by the Tories that these measures amounted to virtual confiscation of privately owned undertakings. Now the boot is on the other foot with a vengeance, in the form of Sealink.
I told the office of the hon. Member for Dorking that during the course of the afternoon I intended to refer to his bid. I quite understand the reason for his absence—he is detained in a Committee of the House. All that I can say about the hon. Member is that he reminds me at least of the villain in H. G. Wells' book "The Autocracy of Mr. Parham"—Sir Blasted Bussy Bussy, Buy-up-the-Universe Woodcock, of whom it was said:
He's the sort of man who buys up everything. Shops and houses and factories. Estates and pot houses. Quarries. Whole trades. Buys things on the way to you. Fiddles about with 'em a bit before you get 'em. You can't eat a pat of butter in London now before he's bought and sold it. Railways he buys, hotels, cinemas and suburbs, men and women, soul and body. Mind he doesn't buy you.That is what H. G. Wells said about the villain in that book.All those sentiments could well be applied to the hon. Member for Dorking, for, not satisfied with his shipping company, a television station, a garage and various other businesses, he now seeks to strip the State of one of its assets. The National Union of Railwaymen, like the National Union of Seamen, will do its best to see that he does not get away with it.
§ Mr. Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. On the question of the hon. Member for Dorking (Mr. Wickenden) and his possible buying up of public assets, to which my hon. Friend the Member for West Bromwich, East (Mr. Snape) referred, can we have a ruling from you whether it is in order for the hon. Member for Dorking to take part in the Division'? In my experience on a local authority before I became a Member it would have been inconceivable for a local authority member to take part in a vote on a matter in which he had a great, or even a small, financial interest. I should like a ruling on the question whether the hon. Member for 195 Dorking, or, indeed, any of his hon. Friends who have a financial stake in this matter, can properly take part in the Division.
§ Mr. Deputy Speaker (Mr. Bernard Weatherill)That is a hypothetical question. I have no idea who is going to take part in any Division, or, indeed, if there is going to be a Division.
§ Mr. FowlerI shall reply rapidly to this debate. I hope that there will not be a Division on the amendment. I think that the right hon. Member for Barrow in Furness (Mr. Booth) regarded it as a probing amendment.
We have taken the view that over the years Sealink has undoubtedly suffered from being within the public sector; it has lacked management attention and it has been deprived of investment. We believe that the future will show little or no improvement, because the board intends to concentrate its scarce available resources on the railways. The board and the Government agree that giving Sealink access to private capital is the only sensible solution. The board hopes that a general flotation of Sealink shares on the stock market will be possible. Obviously, that is something that the Government would welcome. If, on the other hand, the board wants to decide on some other means, it is up to the board. The one point that I wish to emphasise is that the board is in the lead, and it is for it to make proposals.
European Ferries announced some months ago that if the board offered for sale shares in Sealink it would like to acquire a controlling interest. However, no bid has actually been made. European Ferries has merely said that it hopes to make a bid at an appropriate time. It is very much a matter for the board of British Rail. Last month, on the advice of the Director General of Fair Trading, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade referred the proposed bid——
§ It being half past six o'clock,MR. DEPUTY SPEAKER proceeded, pursuant to the Order [9 March] and the Resolution this day, to put forthwith the Question already proposed from the Chair.
§ The House divided: Ayes 221, Noes 299.
186| Division No. 155] | [5.39 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abse, Leo | Archer, Rt Hon Peter |
| Adams, Allen | Ashley, Rt Hon Jack |
| Allaun, Frank | Ashton, Joe |
| Alton, David | Atkinson, N. (H'gey,) |
| Anderson, Donald | Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) |
| Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) | Grant, George (Morpeth) |
| Beith, A. J. | Grant, John (Islington C) |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Grimond, Rt Hon J. |
| Booth, Rt Hon Albert | Hamilton, W. W. (C'tral Fife) |
| Boothroyd, Miss Betty | Hardy, Peter |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon A.(M'b'ro) | Harrison, Rt Hon Walter |
| Bradley, Tom | Hart, Rt Hon Dame Judith |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy |
| Brocklebank-Fowler, C. | Haynes, Frank |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | Healey, Rt Hon Denis |
| Brown, R. C. (N'castle W) | Heffer, Eric S. |
| Brown, Ronald W. (H'ckn'y S) | Hogg, N. (E Dunb't'nshire) |
| Buchan, Norman | Home Robertson, John |
| Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) | Homewood, William |
| Campbell, Ian | Hooley, Frank |
| Campbell-Savours, Dale | Howells, Geraint |
| Canavan, Dennis | Hughes, Mark (Durham) |
| Cant, R. B. | Hughes, Roy (Newport) |
| Carmichael, Neil | Janner, Hon Greville |
| Carter-Jones, Lewis | Jay, Rt Hon Douglas |
| Clark, Dr David (S Shields) | John, Brynmor |
| Cocks, Rt Hon M. (B'stol S) | Johnson, James (Hull West) |
| Cohen, Stanley | Johnston, Russell (Inverness) |
| Concannon, Rt Hon J. D. | Jones, Barry (East Flint) |
| Cook, Robin F. | Jones, Dan (Burnley) |
| Cowans, Harry | Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald |
| Cox, T. (W'dsw'th, Toot'g) | Kerr, Russell |
| Craigen, J. M. | Lambie, David |
| Crowther, J. S. | Lamborn, Harry |
| Cryer, Bob | Lamond, James |
| Cunliffe, Lawrence | Leighton, Ronald |
| Cunningham, G. (Islington S) | Lestor, Miss Joan |
| Cunningham, Dr J. (W'h'n) | Lewis, Arthur (N'ham NW) |
| Davidson, Arthur | Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) |
| Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (L'lli) | Litherland, Robert |
| Davies, Ifor (Gower) | Lofthouse, Geoffrey |
| Davis, Clinton (Hackney C) | Lyon, Alexander (York) |
| Davis, T. (B'ham, Stechf'd) | Lyons, Edward (Bradf'd W) |
| Deakins, Eric | McDonald, Dr Oonagh |
| Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) | McElhone, Frank |
| Dempsey, James | McGuire, Michael (Ince) |
| Dewar, Donald | McKay, Allen (Penistone) |
| Dixon, Donald | McKelvey, William |
| Dobson, Frank | MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor |
| Dormand, Jack | McMahon, Andrew |
| Douglas-Mann, Bruce | McNally, Thomas |
| Dubs, Alfred | McNamara, Kevin |
| Duffy, A. E. P. | McTaggart, Robert |
| Dunn, James A. | McWilliam, John |
| Dunnett, Jack | Magee, Bryan |
| Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. | Marks, Kenneth |
| Eadie, Alex | Marshall, D (G'gow S'ton) |
| Eastham, Ken | Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) |
| Edwards, R. (W'hampt'n S E) | Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) |
| Ellis, R. (NE D'bysh're) | Martin, M (G'gow S'burn) |
| English, Michael | Mason, Rt Hon Roy |
| Ennals, Rt Hon David | Mellish, Rt Hon Robert |
| Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) | Millan, Rt Hon Bruce |
| Evans, John (Newton) | Miller, Dr M. S. (E Kilbride) |
| Field, Frank | Mitchell, Austin (Grimsby) |
| Fitch, Alan | Mitchell, R. C. (Soton Itchen) |
| Fitt, Gerard | Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) |
| Flannery, Martin | Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) |
| Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) | Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon) |
| Foot, Rt Hon Michael | Morton, George |
| Ford, Ben | Moyle, Rt Hon Roland |
| Forrester, John | Newens, Stanley |
| Foster, Derek | Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon |
| Foulkes, George | Ogden, Eric |
| Fraser, J. (Lamb'th, N'w'd) | O'Halloran, Michael |
| Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald | O'Neill, Martin |
| Freud, Clement | Owen, Rt Hon Dr David |
| Garrett, John (Norwich S) | Palmer, Arthur |
| Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend) | Parker, John |
| George, Bruce | Parry, Robert |
| Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John | Pavitt, Laurie |
| Ginsburg, David | Pendry, Tom |
| Golding, John | Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) |
| Gourlay, Harry | Prescott, John |
| Graham, Ted | Price, C. (Lewisham W) |
| Race, Reg | Stoddart, David |
| Radice, Giles | Stott, Roger |
| Rees, Rt Hon M (Leeds S) | Straw, Jack |
| Richardson, Jo | Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley |
| Roberts, Albert (Normanton) | Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth) |
| Roberts, Allan (Bootle) | Thorne, Stan (Preston South) |
| Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) | Tilley, John |
| Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock) | Tinn, James |
| Robertson, George | Torney, Tom |
| Robinson, G. (Coventry NW) | Urwin, Rt Hon Tom |
| Rooker, J. W. | Wainwright, E. (Dearne V) |
| Roper, John | Watkins, David |
| Ross, Ernest (Dundee West) | Weetch, Ken |
| Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) | Welsh, Michael |
| Rowlands, Ted | White, Frank R. |
| Ryman, John | White, J. (G'gow Pollok) |
| Sandelson, Neville | Whitlock, William |
| Sever, John | Wigley, Dafydd |
| Sheerman, Barry | Willey, Rt Hon Frederick |
| Shore, Rt Hon Peter | Williams, Sir J.(W'ton) |
| Short, Mrs Renée | Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E) |
| Silkin, Rt Hon J. (Deptford) | Wilson, William (C'try SE) |
| Skinner, Dennis | Winnick, David |
| Smith, Rt Hon J. (N Lanark) | Woodall, Alec |
| Snape, Peter | Woolmer, Kenneth |
| Soley, Clive | Young, David (Bolton E) |
| Spearing, Nigel | |
| Spriggs, Leslie | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Stallard, A. W. | Mr. Donald Coleman and Mr. James Hamilton. |
| Steel, Rt Hon David | |
| Stewart, Rt Hon D. (W Isles) | |
| NOES | |
| Adley, Robert | Channon, Rt. Hon. Paul |
| Aitken, Jonathan | Chapman, Sydney |
| Alexander, Richard | Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th, S'n) |
| Alison, Michael | Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) |
| Amery, Rt Hon Julian | Clegg, Sir Walter |
| Ancram, Michael | Cockeram, Eric |
| Arnold, Tom | Colvin, Michael |
| Aspinwall, Jack | Cope, John |
| Atkins, Robert (Preston N) | Cormack, Patrick |
| Atkinson, David (B'm'th, E) | Corrie, John |
| Banks, Robert | Costain, Sir Albert |
| Beaumont-Dark, Anthony | Cranborne, Viscount |
| Bell, Sir Ronald | Critchley, Julian |
| Bendall, Vivian | Dean, Paul (North Somerset) |
| Benyon, Thomas (A'don) | Dickens, Geoffrey |
| Benyon, W. (Buckingham) | Dorrell, Stephen |
| Best, Keith | Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. |
| Bevan, David Gilroy | Dover, Denshore |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | du Cann, Rt Hon Edward |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Dunn, Robert (Dartford) |
| Blackburn, John | Durant, Tony |
| Blaker, Peter | Dykes, Hugh |
| Body, Richard | Eden, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Eggar, Tim |
| Boscawen, Hon Robert | Elliott, Sir William |
| Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) | Emery, Peter |
| Bowden, Andrew | Evans, John (Newton) |
| Boyson, Dr Rhodes | Eyre, Reginald |
| Braine, Sir Bernard | Fairbairn, Nicholas |
| Bright, Graham | Fairgrieve, Russell |
| Brinton, Tim | Faith, Mrs Sheila |
| Brittan, Leon | Farr, John |
| Brotherton, Michael | Fenner, Mrs Peggy |
| Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'n) | Finsberg, Geoffrey |
| Browne, John (Winchester) | Fisher, Sir Nigel |
| Bruce-Gardyne, John | Fletcher, A. (Ed'nb'gh N) |
| Bryan, Sir Paul | Fletcher-Cooke, Sir Charles |
| Buchanan-Smith, Alick | Fookes, Miss Janet |
| Buck, Antony | Forman, Nigel |
| Budgen, Nick | Fowler, Rt Hon Norman |
| Burden, Sir Frederick | Fox, Marcus |
| Butcher, John | Fraser, Peter (South Angus) |
| Butler, Hon Adam | Fry, Peter |
| Cadbury, Jocelyn | Galbraith, Hon T. G. D. |
| Carlisle, John (Luton West) | Gardiner, George (Reigate) |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Garel-Jones, Tristan |
| Chalker, Mrs. Lynda | Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian |
| Glyn, Dr Alan | Mellor, David |
| Goodhart, Philip | Meyer, Sir Anthony |
| Goodlad, Alastair | Miller, Hal (B'grove) |
| Gorst, John | Mills, Iain (Meriden) |
| Gow, Ian | Mills, Peter (West Devon) |
| Gower, Sir Raymond | Miscampbell, Norman |
| Grant, Anthony (Harrow C) | Moate, Roger |
| Gray, Hamish | Monro, Hector |
| Grieve, Percy | Montgomery, Fergus |
| Griffiths, E. (B'y St. Edm'ds) | Moore, John |
| Griffiths, Peter Portsm'th N) | Morris, M. (N'hampton S) |
| Grist, Ian | Morrison, Hon P. (Chester) |
| Grylls, Michael | Mudd, David |
| Gummer, John Selwyn | Murphy, Christopher |
| Hamilton, Hon A. | Myles, David |
| Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) | Neale, Gerrard |
| Hampson, Dr Keith | Nelson, Anthony |
| Hannam, John | Neubert, Michael |
| Haselhurst, Alan | Newton, Tony |
| Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael | Normanton, Tom |
| Hawkins, Paul | Onslow, Cranley |
| Hawksley, Warren | Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S. |
| Hayhoe, Barney | Osborn, John |
| Heddle, John | Page, Rt Hon Sir G. (Crosby) |
| Henderson, Barry | Page, Richard (SW Herts) |
| Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L. | Parkinson, Cecil |
| Hill, James | Parris, Matthew |
| Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) | Patten, Christopher (Bath) |
| Holland, Philip (Carlton) | Patten, John (Oxford) |
| Hooson, Tom | Pattie, Geoffrey |
| Hordern, Peter | Pawsey, James |
| Howe, Rt Hon Sir Geoffrey | Percival, Sir Ian |
| Howell, Ralph (N Norfolk) | Pollock, Alexander |
| Hunt, David (Wirral) | Porter, Barry |
| Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) | Prentice, Rt Hon Reg |
| Hurd, Hon Douglas | Price, Sir David (Eastleigh) |
| Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) | Proctor, K. Harvey |
| Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick | Pym, Rt Hon Francis |
| Jessel, Toby | Raison, Timothy |
| Johnson Smith, Geoffrey | Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal) |
| Jopling, Rt Hon Michael | Rees-Davies, W. R. |
| Kershaw, Anthony | Renton, Tim |
| Kimball, Marcus | Rhodes James, Robert |
| King, Rt Hon Tom | Rifkind, Malcolm |
| Kitson, Sir Timothy | Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey |
| Knox, David | Roberts, M. (Cardiff NW) |
| Lamont, Norman | Roberts, Wyn (Conway) |
| Lang, Ian | Rossi, Hugh |
| Langford-Holt, Sir John | Rost, Peter |
| Lawrence, Ivan | Sainsbury, Hon Timothy |
| Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel | St. John-Stevas, Rt Hon N. |
| Lee, John | Scott, Nicholas |
| Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark | Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) |
| Lester, Jim (Beeston) | Shaw, Michael (Scarborough) |
| Lewis, Kenneth (Rutland) | Shelton, William (Streatham) |
| Lloyd, Ian (Havant & W'loo) | Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) |
| Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) | Shepherd, Richard |
| Loveridge, John | Shersby, Michael |
| Luce, Richard | Silvester, Fred |
| Lyell, Nicholas | Sims, Roger |
| McCrindle, Robert | Skeet, T. H. H. |
| Macfarlane, Neil | Smith, Dudley |
| MacGregor, John | Speller, Tony |
| MacKay, John (Argyll) | Spence, John |
| Macmillan, Rt Hon M. | Spicer, Jim (West Dorset) |
| McNair-Wilson, M. (N'bury) | Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) |
| McNair-Wilson, P. (New F'st) | Sproat, Iain |
| McQuarrie, Albert | Stainton, Keith |
| Madel, David | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Major, John | Stanley, John |
| Marland, Paul | Stevens, Martin |
| Marlow, Tony | Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) |
| Marten, Neil (Banbury) | Stewart, A. (E Renfrewshire) |
| Mates, Michael | Stokes, John |
| Mather, Carol | Stradling Thomas, J. |
| Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus | Tapsell, Peter |
| Mawby, Ray | Taylor, Robert (Croydon NW) |
| Mawhinney, Dr Brian | Taylor, Teddy (S'end E) |
| Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin | Tebbit, Norman |
| Mayhew, Patrick | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| Thomas, Rt Hon Peter | Waddington, David |
| Thompson, Donald | Wakeham, John |
| Thorne, Neil (Ilford South) | Walker, Rt Hon P.(W'cester) |
| Thornton, Malcolm | Walker, B. (Perth ) |
| Tilley, John | Walker-Smith, Rt Hon Sir D. |
| Townend, John (Bridlington) | Wall, Patrick |
| Townsend, Cyril D, (B'heath) | Waller, Gary |
| Trippier, David | Walters, Dennis |
| Trotter, Neville | Ward, John |
| van Straubenzee, W. R. | Watson, John |
| Vaughan, Dr Gerard | Wells, John (Maidstone) |
| Wells, Bowen | Wolfson, Mark |
| Wheeler, John | Young, Sir George (Acton) |
| Whitney, Raymond | Younger, Rt Hon George |
| Wickenden, Keith | |
| Wiggin, Jerry | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Wilkinson, John | Mr. Spencer Le Marchant and Mr. Anthony Berry. |
| Williams, D.(Montgomery) | |
| Winterton, Nicholas |
| Division No. 156] | [6.30 pm |
| AYES | |
| Abse, Leo | Canavan, Dennis |
| Adams, Allen | Cant, R. B. |
| Allaun, Frank | Carmichael, Neil |
| Anderson, Donald | Carter-Jones, Lewis |
| Archer, Rt Hon Peter | Clark, Dr David (S Shields) |
| Ashley, Rt Hon Jack | Cocks, Rt Hon M. (B'stol S) |
| Ashton, Joe | Cohen, Stanley |
| Atkinson, N.(H'gey,) | Coleman, Donald |
| Barnett, Guy (Greenwich) | Concannon, Rt Hon J. D. |
| Barnett, Rt Hon Joel (H'wd) | Cook, Robin F. |
| Bidwell, Sydney | Cowans, Harry |
| Booth, Rt Hon Albert | Cox, T. (W'dsw'th, Toot'g) |
| Boothroyd, Miss Betty | Craigen, J. M. |
| Bottomley, Rt Hon A.(M'b'ro) | Crowther, J. S. |
| Bradley, Tom | Cryer, Bob |
| Bray, Dr Jeremy | Cunliffe, Lawrence |
| Brocklebank-Fowler, C. | Cunningham, G. (Islington S) |
| Brown, Hugh D. (Provan) | Cunningham, Dr J. (W'h'n) |
| Brown, R. C. (N'castle W) | Davidson, Arthur |
| Brown, Ronald W. (H'ckn'y S) | Davies, Rt Hon Denzil (L'lli) |
| Buchan, Norman | Davies, Ifor (Gower) |
| Callaghan, Rt Hon J. | Davis, Clinton (Hackney C) |
| Callaghan, Jim (Midd't'n & P) | Davis, T. (B'ham, Stechf'd) |
| Campbell, Ian | Deakins, Eric |
| Campbell-Savours, Dale | Dean, Joseph (Leeds West) |
| Dempsey, James | McMahon, Andrew |
| Dewar, Donald | McNally, Thomas |
| Dixon, Donald | McNamara, Kevin |
| Dobson, Frank | McTaggart, Robert |
| Dormand, Jack | McWilliam, John |
| Douglas-Mann, Bruce | Magee, Bryan |
| Dubs, Alfred | Marks, Kenneth |
| Duffy, A. E. P. | Marshall, D(G'gow S'ton) |
| Dunn, James A. | Marshall, Dr Edmund (Goole) |
| Dunnett, Jack | Marshall, Jim (Leicester S) |
| Dunwoody, Hon Mrs G. | Martin, M(G'gow S'burn) |
| Eadie, Alex | Mason, Rt Hon Roy |
| Eastham, Ken | Meacher, Michael |
| Edwards, R. (W'hampt'n S E) | Mellish, Rt Hon Robert |
| Ellis, R. (NE D'bysh're) | Millan, Rt Hon Bruce |
| English, Michael | Mitchell, Austin (Grimsby) |
| Ennals, Rt Hon David | Mitchell, R. C. (Soton Itchen) |
| Evans, Ioan (Aberdare) | Morris, Rt Hon A. (W'shawe) |
| Evans, John (Newton) | Morris, Rt Hon C. (O'shaw) |
| Field, Frank | Morris, Rt Hon J. (Aberavon) |
| Fitch, Alan | Morton, George |
| Fitt, Gerard | Moyle, Rt Hon Roland |
| Flannery, Martin | Newens, Stanley |
| Fletcher, Raymond (Ilkeston) | Oakes, Rt Hon Gordon |
| Ford, Ben | Ogden, Eric |
| Forrester, John | O'Halloran, Michael |
| Foster, Derek | O'Neill, Martin |
| Foulkes, George | Owen, Rt Hon Dr David |
| Fraser, J. (Lamb'th, N'w'd) | Palmer, Arthur |
| Freeson, Rt Hon Reginald | Parker, John |
| Garrett, John (Norwich S) | Parry, Robert |
| Garrett, W. E. (Wallsend) | Pavitt, Laurie |
| George, Bruce | Pendry, Tom |
| Gilbert, Rt Hon Dr John | Powell, Raymond (Ogmore) |
| Ginsburg, David | Prescott, John |
| Golding, John | Price, C. (Lewisham W) |
| Gourlay, Harry | Race, Reg |
| Graham, Ted | Radice, Giles |
| Grant, George (Morpeth) | Rees, Rt Hon M (Leeds S) |
| Grant, John (Islington C) | Richardson, Jo |
| Hamilton, James (Bothwell) | Roberts, Albert (Normanton) |
| Hamilton, W. W. (C'tral Fife) | Roberts, Allan (Bootle) |
| Hardy, Peter | Roberts, Ernest (Hackney N) |
| Harrison, Rt Hon Walter | Roberts, Gwilym (Cannock) |
| Hart, Rt Hon Dame Judith | Robertson, George |
| Hattersley, Rt Hon Roy | Robinson, G. (Coventry NW) |
| Haynes, Frank | Rooker, J. W. |
| Heffer, Eric S. | Roper, John |
| Hogg, N. (E Dunb't'nshire) | Ross, Ernest (Dundee West) |
| Home Robertson, John | Rowlands, Ted |
| Homewood, William | Ryman, John |
| Hooley, Frank | Sandelson, Neville |
| Hughes, Mark (Durham) | Sever, John |
| Hughes, Roy (Newport) | Sheerman, Barry |
| Janner, Hon Greville | Short, Mrs Renée |
| Jay, Rt Hon Douglas | Silkin, Rt Hon J. (Deptford) |
| John, Brynmor | Skinner, Dennis |
| Johnson, James (Hull West) | Smith, Rt Hon J. (N Lanark) |
| Johnson, Walter (Derby S) | Snape, Peter |
| Jones, Barry (East Flint) | Soley, Clive |
| Jones, Dan (Burnley) | Spearing, Nigel |
| Kaufman, Rt Hon Gerald | Spriggs, Leslie |
| Kerr, Russell | Stallard, A. W. |
| Lambie, David | Stewart, Rt Hon D. (W Isles) |
| Lamborn, Harry | Stoddart, David |
| Lamond, James | Stott, Roger |
| Leighton, Ronald | Straw, Jack |
| Lestor, Miss Joan | Summerskill, Hon Dr Shirley |
| Lewis, Arthur (N'ham NW) | Thomas, Dafydd (Merioneth) |
| Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) | Thorne, Stan (Preston South) |
| Litherland, Robert | Tilley, John |
| Lofthouse, Geoffrey | Torney, Tom |
| Lyon, Alexander (York) | Urwin, Rt Hon Tom |
| Lyons, Edward (Bradf'd W) | Wainwright, E.(Dearne V) |
| McCartney, Hugh | Watkins, David |
| McDonald, Dr Oonagh | Weetch, Ken |
| McElhone, Frank | Wellbeloved, James |
| McGuire, Michael (Ince) | Welsh, Michael |
| McKelvey, William | White, Frank R. |
| MacKenzie, Rt Hon Gregor | White, J. (G'gow Pollok) |
| Whitlock, William | Woodall, Alec |
| Wigley, Dafydd | Woolmer, Kenneth |
| Willey, Rt Hon Frederick | Young, David (Bolton E) |
| Williams, Sir T.(W'ton) | |
| Wilson, Gordon (Dundee E) | Tellers for the Ayes: |
| Wilson, Rt Hon Sir H.(H'ton) | Mr. James Tinn and Mr. Allen McKay |
| Wilson, William (C'try SE) | |
| Winnick, David |
| NOES | |
| Adley, Robert | Durant, Tony |
| Aitken, Jonathan | Dykes, Hugh |
| Alexander, Richard | Eden, Rt Hon Sir John |
| Alison, Michael | Eggar, Tim |
| Alton, David | Elliott, Sir William |
| Amery, Rt Hon Julian | Emery, Peter |
| Ancram, Michael | Eyre, Reginald |
| Arnold, Tom | Fairbairn, Nicholas |
| Aspinwall, Jack | Fairgrieve, Russell |
| Atkins, Robert(Preston N) | Faith, Mrs Sheila |
| Atkinson, David (B'm'th, E) | Farr, John |
| Baker, Nicholas (N Dorset) | Fenner, Mrs Peggy |
| Banks, Robert | Finsberg, Geoffrey |
| Beaumont-Dark, Anthony | Fisher, Sir Nigel |
| Beith, A. J. | Fletcher, A. (Ed'nb'gh N) |
| Bell, Sir Ronald | Fletcher-Cooke, Sir Charles |
| Bendall, Vivian | Fookes, Miss Janet |
| Benyon, Thomas (A'don) | Forman, Nigel |
| Benyon, W. (Buckingham) | Fowler, Rt Hon Norman |
| Best, Keith | Fox, Marcus |
| Bevan, David Gilroy | Fraser, Peter (South Angus) |
| Biffen, Rt Hon John | Freud, Clement |
| Biggs-Davison, John | Fry, Peter |
| Blackburn, John | Galbraith, Hon T. G. D. |
| Blaker, Peter | Gardiner, George (Reigate) |
| Body, Richard | Gardner, Edward (S Fylde) |
| Bonsor, Sir Nicholas | Garel-Jones, Tristan |
| Boscawen, Hon Robert | Gilmour, Rt Hon Sir Ian |
| Bottomley, Peter (W'wich W) | Glyn, Dr Alan |
| Bowden, Andrew | Goodhart, Philip |
| Boyson, Dr Rhodes | Goodlad, Alastair |
| Braine, Sir Bernard | Gorst, John |
| Bright, Graham | Gow, Ian |
| Brinton, Tim | Gower, Sir Raymond |
| Brittan, Leon | Grant, Anthony (Harrow C) |
| Brotherton, Michael | Gray, Hamish |
| Brown, Michael (Brigg & Sc'n) | Greenway, Harry |
| Browne, John (Winchester) | Grieve, Percy |
| Bruce-Gardyne, John | Griffiths, E.(B'ySt. Edm'ds) |
| Bryan, Sir Paul | Griffiths, Peter Portsm'th N) |
| Buchanan-Smith, Alick | Grimond, Rt Hon J. |
| Buck, Antony | Grist, Ian |
| Budgen, Nick | Grylls, Michael |
| Burden, Sir Frederick | Gummer, John Selwyn |
| Butcher, John | Hamilton, Hon A. |
| Butler, Hon Adam | Hamilton, Michael (Salisbury) |
| Carlisle, John (Luton West) | Hampson, Dr Keith |
| Carlisle, Kenneth (Lincoln) | Hannam, John |
| Chalker, Mrs. Lynda | Haselhurst, Alan |
| Channon, Rt. Hon. Paul | Havers, Rt Hon Sir Michael |
| Chapman, Sydney | Hawkins, Paul |
| Churchill, W. S. | Hawksley, Warren |
| Clark, Hon A. (Plym'th, S'n) | Hayhoe, Barney |
| Clarke, Kenneth (Rushcliffe) | Heddle, John |
| Clegg, Sir Walter | Henderson, Barry |
| Cockeram, Eric | Heseltine, Rt Hon Michael |
| Colvin, Michael | Higgins, Rt Hon Terence L. |
| Cope, John | Hill, James |
| Cormack, Patrick | Hogg, Hon Douglas (Gr'th'm) |
| Corrie, John | Holland, Philip (Carlton) |
| Costain, Sir Albert | Hooson, Tom |
| Cranborne, Viscount | Hordern, Peter |
| Critchley, Julian | Howell, Rt Hon D. (G'ldf'd) |
| Dean, Paul (North Somerset) | Howell, Ralph (N Norfolk) |
| Dickens, Geoffrey | Howells, Geraint |
| Dorrell, Stephen | Hunt, David (Wirral) |
| Douglas-Hamilton, Lord J. | Hunt, John (Ravensbourne) |
| Dover, Denshore | Hurd, Hon Douglas |
| du Cann, Rt Hon Edward | Irving, Charles (Cheltenham) |
| Dunn, Robert (Dartford) | Jenkin, Rt Hon Patrick |
| Jessel, Toby | Proctor, K Harvey |
| Johnson Smith Geoffrey | Pym, Rt Hon Francis |
| Johnston, Russell (Inverness) | Raison, Timothy |
| Jopling, Rt Hon Michael | Rees, Peter (Dover and Deal) |
| Kershaw, Anthony | Rees-Davies, W R |
| Kimball, Marcus | Renton, Tim |
| King, Rt Hon Tom | Rhodes James, Robert |
| Kitson, Sir Timothy | Ridley, Hon Nicholas |
| Knox, David | Rifkind, Malcolm |
| Lamont, Norman | Rippon, Rt Hon Geoffrey |
| Lang, Ian | Roberts, M (Cardiff NW) |
| Langford-Holt, Sir John | Roberts, Wyn (Conway) |
| Lawrence, Ivan | Ross, Stephen (Isle of Wight) |
| Lawson, Rt Hon Nigel | Rossi, Hugh |
| Lee, John | Rost, Peter |
| Lennox-Boyd, Hon Mark | Royle, Sir Anthony |
| Lester, Jim (Beeston) | Sainsbury, Hon Timothy |
| Lewis, Ron (Carlisle) | St John-Stevas, Rt Hon N |
| Lloyd, Ian (Havant & W'loo) | Scott, Nicholas |
| Lloyd, Peter (Fareham) | Shaw, Giles (Pudsey) |
| Loveridge, John | Shaw, Michael (Scarborough) |
| Luce, Richard | Shelton, William (Streatham) |
| Lyell, Nicholas | Shepherd, Colin (Hereford) |
| McCrindle, Robert | Shepherd, Richard |
| Macfarlane, Neil | Shersby, Michael |
| MacGregor, John | Silvester, Fred |
| MacKay, John (Argyll) | Sims, Roger |
| Macmillan, Rt Hon M | Skeet, T H H |
| McNair-Wilson, M (N bury) | Smith, Dudley |
| McNair-Wilson, P (New F'st) | Speller, Tony |
| McQuarrie, Albert | Spence, John |
| Madel, David | Spicer, Jim (West Dorset) |
| Major, John | Spicer, Michael (S Worcs) |
| Marland, Paul | Sproat, Iain |
| Marten, Neil (Banbury) | Stainton, Keith |
| Mates, Michael | Stanbrook, Ivor |
| Mather, Carol | Stanley, John |
| Maude, Rt Hon Sir Angus | Steel, Rt Hon David |
| Mawby, Ray | Stevens, Martin |
| Mawhinney, Dr Brian | Stewart, Ian (Hitchin) |
| Maxwell-Hyslop, Robin | Stewart, A (E Renfrewshire) |
| Mayhew, Patrick | Stokes, John |
| Mellor, David | Stradling Thomas, J |
| Meyer, Sir Anthony | Tapsell, Peter |
| Miller, Hal (B'grove) | Taylor, Robert (Croydon NW) |
| Mills, Iain (Meriden) | Taylor, Teddy (S'end E) |
| Mills, Peter (West Devon) | Tebbit, Norman |
| Miscampbell, Norman | Temple-Morris, Peter |
| Moate, Roger | Thomas, Rt Hon Peter |
| Monro, Hector | Thompson, Donald |
| Montgomery, Fergus | Thorne, Neil (Ilford South) |
| Moore, John | Thornton Malcolm |
| Morris, M (N hampton S) | Townend, John (Bridlington) |
| Morrison, Hon P (Chester) | Townsend, Cyril D, (B heath) |
| Mudd, David | Tnppier, David |
| Murphy, Christopher | Trotter, Neville |
| Myles, David | van Straubenzee, W R |
| Neale, Gerrard | Vaughan, Dr Gerard |
| Nelson, Anthony | Viggers, Peter |
| Neubert, Michael | Waddington, David |
| Newton, Tony | Wakeham, John |
| Normanton, Tom | Walker, Rt Hon P (W'cester) |
| Onslow, Cranley | Walker, B (Perth) |
| Oppenheim, Rt Hon Mrs S | Walker-Smith, Rt Hon Sir D. |
| Osborn, John | Wall, Patrick |
| Page, Rt Hon Sir G (Crosby) | Waller, Gary |
| Page, Richard (SW Herts) | Walters, Dennis |
| Parkinson, Cecil | Ward, John |
| Parris, Matthew | Watson, John |
| Patten, Christopher (Bath) | Wells, John (Maidstone) |
| Patten, John (Oxford) | Wells, Bowen |
| Pattie, Geoffrey | Wheeler, John |
| Pawsey, James | Whitney, Raymond |
| Percival, Sir Ian | Wiggin, Jerry |
| Pollock, Alexander | Wilkinson, John |
| Porter, Barry | Williams, D (Montgomery) |
| Prentice, Rt Hon Reg | Winterton, Nicholas |
| Price, Sir David (Eastleigh) | Wolfson, Mark |
| Young, Sir George (Acton) | Tellers for the Noes: |
| Younger, Rt Hon George | Mr. Spencer Le Marchant and Mr. Anthony Berry |
§ Question accordingly negatived.
§ Mr. DEPUTY SPEAKER then proceeded to put forthwith the Questions necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded at half-past Six o'clock.
§
Amendment made: No. 5, in page 3, line 43, at end insert—
'(5) In section 4(5) of the Railways Act 1974 (duty of Board to include certain information in the annual report made under section 4), after the words "1962 Act", in paragraph (b), there are inserted the words "section 3 of the Transport Act 1981".'.—[Mr. Fowler.]