§ 18. Mr. Hickmetasked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will take into account the effect of the coal strike upon the British Steel Corporation's target of achieving viability by December 1985 when considering the future capital investment programme and external financing limits of the corporation.
§ Mr. Norman LamontYes, Sir.
§ Mr. HickmetDoes my hon. Friend agree that the British Steel Corporation's half year figures show that despite the National Union of Mineworkers' attempt to sabotage BSC at a cost of £100 million, much of which has been incurred in my constituency, the corporation has nevertheless shown a significant improvement in its competitive and productive performance? Will my hon. Friend bear in mind, when fixing external financing limits, that the cost of the miners' strike should not be paid for by a cut in the corporation's capital investment programme? Moreover, if the corporation is to maintain and sustain viability, it is essential that, at tomorrow's meeting of the European Council of Ministers, my hon. Friend presses for an increase in the quota share in real terms and percentage terms for BSC. Will my hon. Friend give an assurance in that regard?
§ Mr. LamontI can assure my hon. Friend that at tomorrow's meeting of the Steel Council I shall press the problems about quotas to which he has referred. I had a meeting with BSC yesterday to agree the line that we will take. The signs are that the EFL will need to be increased once the strike is over. When the additional costs are known, we shall consider the matter. The real danger associated with cutting investment and in closing plants comes not from the Government but from Opposition Members who have supported the miners' strike. I agree with my hon. Friend that it is remarkable that BSC is making as much steel—in some cases more steel—than before the miners' strike. That is a remarkable tribute to the determination and courage of those who work in BSC.
§ Mr. EwingIn regard to the capital investment programme, will the Minister give an absolute guarantee that when the programme is decided Ravenscraig will receive its fair share? When is the Minister likely to make a decision about the much-needed investment for the renewal of coke ovens at Ravenscraig?
§ Mr. LamontA decision on the latter point depends considerably on the end of the miners' strike. As we have told the House, and agreed with the chairman of BSC, we cannot draw up a sensible plan until we know precisely what the position is as regards the miners' strike. I cannot give any guarantees about anything, but the hon. Gentleman knows that, with regard to Ravenscraig, which is of great interest, circumstances are exactly as they have always been stated to the House.
§ Mr. CabornIs the miners' strike the reason for not announcing the Government's proposals for Phoenix II? If not, will the Minister say what are the reasons for the delay?
§ Mr. LamontThe miners' strike is not the reason. I know that this matter is of great interest to the hon. Member, but only in the past few days have we received final proposals from the companies involved. We are studying them now.
§ Mr. John SmithFollowing the Minister's answer in relation to investment in Ravenscraig, is he aware of the worry that has arisen from the fact that documents have been published showing that the British Steel Corporation does not intend to find the finance to replace the coke ovens at Ravenscraig, without which it is hard to envisage a viable future for the plant? Does he agree that it is highly desirable that the investment is found for the coke ovens as an essential part of the continuation of the plant?
§ Mr. LamontI have read press reports about those documents and know that some hon. Members have discussed them with the chairman of the corporation. Those proposals have not been put to us, and the position is as I described it.