Private Shareholding (Hansard, 29 October 1987)

§ 3. Mr. Fallon
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give the latest figures on the extent of private shareholding in the United Kingdom.

§ The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Mr. Nigel Lawson)
At the beginning of this year the number of shareholders in the United Kingdom stood at 8½ million, almost three times the 1979 figure.

§ Mr. Fallon
Is my right hon. Friend in a position to announce whether the sale of BP will proceed?

§ Mr. Lawson
No, Sir. Most of the procedures that I described to the House on Tuesday have now been completed, but I have yet to receive the Bank of England's assessment in response to the joint approach to the Bank this morning by the Treasury and Rothschild on behalf of 436 the underwriters. I hope to make my decision later today and I will, of course, be glad to inform the House of that decision in whatever way is convenient.

§ Mr. Sedgemore
Will the Chancellor give the House details of the blazing row which took place yesterday between the Treasury and the Americans over the BP flotation? Will he say whether he expects repercussions on Wall street? If the flotation is not 100 per cent. successful, who will be to blame?

§ Mr. Lawson
There was no blazing row. The causation flows in the opposite direction to that indicated by the hon. Gentleman. It was not the BP flotation that caused the crash of Wall street; it was the slide on Wall street that led to the gross under-subscription of the BP flotation.

§ Mr. Hind
Does my right hon. Friend agree that instead of opposing wider share ownership, we should set about—[HON. MEMBERS: "Reading".]

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. The hon. Gentleman should not read.

§ Mr. Hind
Will my right hon. Friend note the wise words of the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould), one of the Opposition spokesmen on the subject—

§ Mr. Speaker
Order. Do not quote either, please. The hon. Gentleman should paraphrase.

§ Mr. Hind
To paraphrase, the hon. Gentleman said that the country should come to terms with share ownership and regard it as a good thing. Perhaps Labour Members should take his advice on the subject.

§ Mr. Lawson
Although my hon. Friend is unable to quote the hon. Member for Dagenham (Mr. Gould), I am able to do so. It is one of the few privileges afforded to Ministers. Among other things, he said: We should take share ownership seriously as a means of spreading economic power and giving people a stake in the enterprise they work for. I quite agree.

§ Mr. John Smith
Is it not clear that the BP share sale has been a total flop and that, in addition, it will be deeply damaging to the interests of BP? Will not BP now be saddled with the most unwilling shareholders in financial history? Should not the Government take an opportunity to announce that the sale is to be abandoned permanently, not to excuse underwriters but to protect the interests of Britain's greatest company? Will the Chancellor take this opportunity to confirm—he denied it on Tuesday—that he has to pay for the rights issue from BP at 330p and that he will have to hand over the money tomorrow?

§ Mr. Lawson
The right hon. and learned Gentleman raised the last point on Tuesday and, as he knows, he is wrong. On the other matters concerning BP, I think that it would be right for me to make no further comment until I have decided whether or not the sale should go ahead.

§ Mr. Colvin
Bearing in mind the traditional links between the Labour party and the trade union movement, will my right hon. Friend take this opportunity to welcome the concern shown by Opposition Members about the state of the stock market? Surely that is living proof—if it were required—that there are now more shareholders than trade union members in this country.

§ Mr. Lawson
I do, indeed, welcome the interest in the stock market shown by Opposition Members. I hope that as time goes by it will become a more educated interest.