Short Brothers (Hansard, 28 July 1988)

§ 7. Sir Michael McNair-Wilson
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what further proposals he is considering for privatising Short Brothers.

§ Mr. Viggers
I informed the House in a statement on 21 July that the Government were ready to consider suitable proposals that might lead to the acquisition of Short Brothers by private sector interests.

§ Sir Michael McNair-Wilson
While privatisation remains the ultimate goal of the Government's policy towards the company, can my hon. Friend say what steps are being taken in the meantime to return the company to profitability and to give it the long-overdue capital restructuring and the same approach that has been given to other state industries that have been returned to the private sector?

§ Mr. Viggers
I recognise that the company would benefit from further capitalisation. However, we take the view that the proper disciplines of the private sector are appropriate to the company and that it would be for the private sector acquirers of the enterprise to decide what further capitalisation they propose to make.

§ Mr. Orme
Is the Minister aware of the Opposition's deep concern about Short Brothers? The firm is a flagship for Northern Ireland because of its high technology and modern development. If it were to be sold off and then broken up, that would be a disaster. The Government should leave Short Brothers in public hands and develop the company, rather than retard it.

§ Mr. Viggers
We are well aware of the importance of Short Brothers to Northern Ireland and I recognise that the work force must be apprehensive. However, we believe that the long-term interests of the employees and of the company generally will best be served by the company operating within the private sector.

§ Mr. A. Cecil Walker
Given that the production of commercial aircraft is subsidised either by open subsidy or by the construction of military aircraft, will the Minister explain why Short Brothers has been singled out and accused of being a loss-maker?

§ Mr. Viggers
It is quite wrong to say that Short Brothers has been singled out in terms of privatisation. The policy of privatisation—in which the Government firmly believe—has been extended to some 17 enterprises in Great Britain and we believe that it is right that companies and organisations in Northern Ireland should also benefit from the disciplines and opportunities of the private sector.

§ Mr. Kilfedder
If Short Brothers is sold off by the Government—and I hope that it will not be—will they ensure that the purchaser gives a guarantee to maintain the employment level in that admirable firm, which, as the right hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Orme) said, leads in technology in Northern Ireland? Will the Minister also ensure that the eventual purchaser will not be receiving money from Libya, especially in view of the important missile division at Short Brothers?

§ Mr. Viggers
We shall, of course, take account of all interests, including the national interest, in considering all the proposals that we have for the acquisition of Short Brothers by the private sector. We shall also, of course, take account of employment interests.

§ Mr. Jim Marshall
Is the Minister aware that in London today there are representatives of all the work force of Short Brothers in Belfast and that they are unanimous in the view that privatisation of Short Brothers would be to the disadvantage not only of their own jobs but of the company as a whole? Is the Minister further aware that they feel that if the company is sold, either wholly or in parts, that will lead inevitably to closure and to massive job losses? What reassurance can the Minister give to those people in London today and to the work force as a whole?

§ Mr. Viggers
The future of Short Brothers is best served, not by continued dependence on public ownership, but by the disciplines and opportunities of the private sector. I must tell the hon. Gentleman that in the 17 public sector organisations that have moved to the private sector in Great Britain there are about 655,000 workers, many of whom now find it far more advantageous to be operating within the private sector and very few of whom, I suspect, would want to be transferred back into the public sector.