§ 7. Mr. Lambieasked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will meet the chairman of British Steel to discuss the recent announcement on the future of Glengarnock steelworks.
§ Mr. YoungerI met the chairman of the British Steel Corporation on 29 November, when we had a wideranging discussion of the corporation's activities in Scotland. I have no plans for a further meeting in the near future.
§ Mr. LambieI appeal to the Secretary of State to meet the chairman of the British Steel Corporation again to discuss the case for retention. It will be supported at a meeting tomorrow with his hon. Friend the Under- Secretary of State, the Member for Eastwood (Mr. Stewart), by the steel workers' acting committee and councillors from Strathclyde and the regional council. It will show that Glengarnock steelworks can be viable, competitive and profitable if given a chance.
§ Mr. YoungerAs the hon. Gentleman will be aware, I am worried about this matter. I am glad that my hon. Friend is meeting those representatives tomorrow. I know that he is looking forward to hearing the case that they put forward.
§ Mr. CorrieIf my right hon. Friend meets the chairman of the British Steel Corporation again, will he point out that it will cost more to close the works than to keep them open? Is my right hon. Friend further aware that with its new proposals the work force is pricing itself into jobs by cutting costs in line with Government policy, to its own detriment? If the British Steel Corporation is determined to close these works and get rid of Glengarnock, will he suggest that they should be kept open to give a private buyer a chance to see whether the firstclass work force can keep its jobs?
§ Mr. YoungerI am grateful to my hon. Friend for keeping me so closely informed of his constituents' anxiety about this matter. The decision to close, which I greatly regret, is one entirely to be made as an operational matter by the British Steel Corporation. There is no doubt about the commitment of the work force. I am sure that the facts and figures that it will produce will be listened to with the greatest of interest by my hon. Friend and the British Steel Corporation.
§ Mr. DewarMay I take up strongly with the right hon. Gentleman the point that he made about it being an operational decision for the British Steel Corporation? If that is the Government's final view, I fear that the works may have a short future, because the British Steel Corporation seems determined, despite the far-reaching 323 and imaginative proposals which will eliminate the current deficit in the plant, to continue with its closure plans. Will the Secretary of State try to persuade his colleagues and himself, sadly, in view of what he has just said, that the Government cannot shelter behind the concept that it is a bold management decision by the British Steel Corporation, given the impact that the loss of a further 200 key jobs will have on an area of high unemployment? I hope that he will reconsider the matter, because if he does not the outlook is black.
§ Mr. YoungerI sympathise with the whole position, of course. I do not accept, and nor would his own Government, the hon. Gentleman's point that this is anything other than an operational decision for the British Steel Corporation. That has always been the way that such matters have worked. We cannot appoint people to manage an industry and then second-guess them on everything that they do. For that reason the representations should be made to the British Steel Corporation, and I know that that is where they will be made.