HC Deb 02 May 1984 vol 59 cc336-8
8. Mr. Hardy

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the total volume of United Kingdom steel production in 1983; and how this compares with the amount produced in 1973 and in 1978.

Mr. Norman Lamont

In 1983 crude steel production in the United Kingdom was 15 million tonnes. In 1973 it was 26.5 million tonnes and in 1978 20.5 million tonnes.

Mr. Hardy

Does not that sorry picture reveal the absolute need for us to tell our European partners that we will not allow any further contraction of our steel industry, not least because of their failure to fulfil their commitments to pursue the British course? Does the Minister accept that if the proclaimed economic recovery proves to be significant our steel industry may already have been contracted excessively?

Mr. Lamont

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman does not mention the decline in steel production that occurred under the Labour Government. That appears to be very different. There is, indeed, a recovery in steel production in the United Kingdom. In 1983 it rose by 9 per cent., whereas in the EEC as a whole it declined by 7 per cent.

As to other countries cutting back, as a result of our talks the French have undertaken to cut back by 5 million tonnes, the Germans by 6.5 million tonnes and the Italians by 5.8 million tonnes. We have cut back by 4 million tonnes.

Mr. Hickmet

Does my hon. Friend share the view that steel production and a recovery in the steel industry this year are gravely affected by the coal mining dispute and that plants such as Ravenscraig, Scunthorpe and Port Talbot are at risk?

Mr. Lamont

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. Opposition Members often urge us to save a particular plant that is under threat, but make no noises about their friends on the picket line who are threatening those plants.

Mr. Bell

Is the Minister aware that between 1979 and 1983 the British Steel Corporation's work force on Teesside was reduced from 25,000 to 7,500? Is he also aware that there will be grave disappointment on Teesside if the recommendations of the Select Committee with

regard to the production of our European competitors are not followed? Is he further aware that the BSC work force on Teesside will not be happy simply to accept the undertakings of our European partners, which have been given in the past but never kept?

Mr. Lamont

The hon. Gentleman will know that we have made it very clear that we expect other European countries to undertake capacity cutbacks such as we have done. This morning I talked to a German Minister about this very matter and made our views clear. The hon. Gentleman will know that from 1979 to 1983 there were inevitably large cutbacks throughout the world and falls in production. The 40 per cent. fall in the United States was identical to that which occurred here.

Mr. Teddy Taylor

As more than two thirds of Britain's steel imports now come direct from other countries in the Common Market, is it not fair and reasonable for Britain to resist further British closures until some of these European undertakings are delivered?

Mr. Lamont

My hon. Friend should take account of the fact that import penetration is very low and has been going down. Imports last year were 25 per cent., whereas a few years ago they were 27 per cent. This compares with imports of 46 per cent. in France and 32 per cent. in Germany. The position is getting better. The regime and policies that we have followed have enabled us to recapture our markets and improve our industry. The position is getting better, not worse.

Mr. Wallace

Bearing in mind the great concern about the future of steel production at Ravenscraig following the decision of the triple alliance this morning to withold all but one delivery a day of coking coal to the plant, what steps, if any, do the Government propose to take to ensure the continuation of steel production at Ravenscraig?

Mr. Lamont

I understand that at a meeting of the triple alliance at Edinburgh this morning the coal and rail unions rejected strong pressure from the Scottish steel unions to reconsider last weekend's decision. The steel unions said that this would leave the plant doing little more than ticking over and that they would therefore back the BSC management in using road transport as an alternative. Arrangements for using lorries are now being made.

Mr. Ward

Is my hon. Friend aware that the export trade, which has been painfully built up by British Steel, is being jeopardised by the miners' activities and will result in a loss of jobs in the steel industry and in the mines as well? Does he agree that there are many producers on the continent who are waiting to snap up these markets if British steelworks are forced to close by the miners?

Mr. Lamont

My hon. Friend is right. The longer the damage continues, the more the prospects of BSC will be damaged. There can be no escaping that fact.

Mr. Ewing

Does the Minister realise that in the House he represents the British steel industry, not the German or French industries, and that 25 per cent. import penetration is still far too high, even if it is lower than in previous years? Does he agree that we should be making every effort to step up steel production? Does he accept that the Opposition take the firm view that Ravenscraig is just as important to the Scottish miners and Scottish railway workers as it is to the Scottish steel industry, and that Ravenscraig cannot survive on one trainload of coal a day? The Opposition ask the miners and the railwaymen to reconsider the decision that has been made today.

Mr. Lamont

That is an extremely welcome statement from the hon. Gentleman and I hope that he will repeat it loud and clear many times outside the House. I remind him that steel production is increasing and that imports have been falling. They are both moving in the right direction and we are doing what the hon. Gentleman said.