§ 3.42 p.m.
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT (LORD CHESHAM)My Lords, with your Lordships' leave, I think it might be convenient for me to make a statement about the Rochdale Report on the major ports of this country, similar to that which is now being made in another place. The Government have now reached their conclusions on the major recommendations of the Rochdale Committee. Once again we should like to thank Lord Rochdale and his colleagues for their work. We are also grateful to the various organisations which have let us have their views.
The Government accept the central thesis of the Report, namely, that in future the development of individual ports should be consistent with a national plan. We also accept the recommendation to set up a central body, which will be termed the National Ports Council, whose primary function will be to formulate the national plan, and supervise its execution. Implementation of the national plan will be achieved through control by the Government of capital investment. In this connection we accept that there is a need to concentrate development, and for a higher level of investment, and for better access to ports.
Additional functions of the National Ports Council will include: preparing plans for the grouping of ports by geographical areas, wherever it appears that this would make for greater efficiency; the control and regulation of port charges, subject to appeal to my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport; the standardisation of statistics; the coordination of research; advising on port organisation and management; and, finally, recruitment, training, and education of non-industrial staff.
No port will be wholly outside the Council's terms of reference. There are, however, certain ports in which my right honourable friends the Ministers of Transport, Agriculture, and Power, and the Secretary of State for Scotland, already have specific responsibilities under Statute. These ports include the transport piers in the Highlands and 424 Islands, fishery docks and harbours, certain iron ore ports and the ports in national ownership. The relationship of the National Ports Council to these ports calls for special consideration, and my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport will pursue this matter with his right honourable friends.
The Committee concluded that capital investment in ports should normally be regarded as an ordinary commercial undertaking, although they recognised that there might be cases where Government loans, or even grants, in exceptional circumstances, might be justified. The Government strongly endorse the Committee's view that our ports must pay their way. Nevertheless, if port development is to go forward as part of a national plan, approved by my right honourable friend on the advice of the National Ports Council, it seems right that a port should be treated for the purpose of financing its approved investment broadly on the same basis as a local or other public authority.
I indicated earlier that one of the functions of the National Ports Council will be to prepare plans for estuarial groupings where these appear desirable. The object of such groupings would be to promote efficiency, and we do not consider that this necessarily involves a common pattern of ownership or organisation. In particular, the Government regard it as premature to come to any conclusion now about the future status of the ports at present operated by the British Transport Docks Board.
The Government accept the Committee's conclusions that insufficient resources are at present devoted to research and development. We are not yet satisfied, however, that the establishment of a separate research organisation for the industry would be the best solution. This will be examined further, and discussed with the National Ports Council after it has been set up.
Legislation will be required before the Council can exercise all the functions which I have described. Meanwhile there is much preparatory work to be done. My right honourable friend therefore intends to establish an advisory panel as soon as possible, which can form the nucleus of the future Council. This will enable an early start to be made with the preparation of a national plan. I 425 am glad to inform the House that the noble Viscount, Lord Rochdale, has accepted an invitation by my right honourable friend to be the first Chairman of the new body.
§ 3.46 p.m.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am obliged to the noble Lord, Lord Chesham, for giving us the Minister's statement and I would join with him in expressing our thanks for the amount of work which has been put in by the noble Viscount, Lord Rochdale, into the leading of the Committee who formulated the main Report. I think he deserves the thanks of the House.
After reading the statement in the early copy supplied to me, and after listening to it read now by the noble Lord, I think it is an exceedingly "mixed grill". I can see that the Government are faced with some particular difficulties, but I am quite amazed at their method of dealing with the subject. For example, they are going to have this Council set up, but they do not yet know exactly what the Council's powers will be; they have not thought it out. The Government say they cannot do anything until they have had legislation; and that they have not thought out; but in the meantime the Council are to go on working. I really must say that this is another repetition of what I call Government shuffling along. It really is not the way to go about Government business.
Moreover, as I see it, while no doubt in almost any sphere you can say "Thank you" for a constructive piece of work that will result in real coordination, perhaps in services, I find enough in this statement to show that the Government have not made up their mind as to whether in particular areas it is going to be an actual approach almost towards a nationalisation basis, or whether it is going to be merely the creation of an authority over a particular area for purposes of co-ordination. It seemed fairly clear to me as I listened more carefully to the noble Lord, after having read the statement, that the area authorities to be set up will have financial control over the whole of the particular area.
I think your Lordships will agree that before the Government go much further 426 on this matter it would be advisable that in both Houses of Parliament there should be full and frank discussion as to what is intended by the Government within the framework of this statement. I would say to the noble Lord, for example, that unless the Government are fairly rapid in taking final powers from Parliament some schemes will undoubtedly be held up or scrapped; and I have one particularly in mind. I suppose the only solely municipally-owned port is Bristol. Here is a port which is advancing all along the line. It has increased its tonnage handled per annum by over 2½ million tons in the last few years. It has a scheme in hand at this present moment which will cost £25 million for extending the operations of the port in a new site adjacent to the other at Portbury; and, as I read the Report of the Rochdale Committee, that scheme will either be held up indefinitely or destroyed. That seems to me to be a very great pity.
I hope I have said enough to indicate to the noble Lord, Lord Chesham, that there are features about this Report that one would really desire to welcome. On the other hand, I wish the Government would make up their mind and not leave quite a number of ports which have grown up naturally around the coasts to be suddenly, in the future, subjected to what is called "commercial results", and closed down, as has been done in so many instances in the British Transport Commission under the Dr. Beeching policy, causing all the extension of human suffering and unemployment that happened there. I hope that the Minister will arrange—perhaps Lord Chesham will consult him about this—that both in the Commons and in this House we might have an early debate on the matter and perhaps a White Paper.
LORD REAMy Lords, while agreeing largely with the noble Earl, I should like to give this project a rather warmer welcome. It is perfectly true, of course, there is not very much to get one's teeth into at the moment, but I think that in general the port authorities and others concerned with the ports in this country are all glad that this matter has been put in motion. Details are of course always subject to criticism, but I think the general feeling is that this is a good move in the right direction, 427 and I suggest that to set up an advisory panel now to put forward some sort of tentative suggestions is indeed the very way to put before Parliament certain matters which can be criticised and worked out. While I have sympathy with the noble Earl, Lord Alexander of Hillsborough, about the rather vague part of this proposal, all the ports are really looking forward to something of this sort in order to get some sort of co-ordination. I do not speak specially for Bristol, of which the noble Earl knows so much, but of new ports such as Milford Haven and some of our old ports like Liverpool and London which are very much looking forward to encouragement and some sort of co-operation. While I do not endorse everything the Government may have in hand, I welcome the general scheme to enable people to discuss what might be done.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I have been interested, although perhaps not very surprised, by the reception that this statement has received, and I would at once agree with the noble Earl who leads the Opposition that a debate is no doubt desirable to air this matter thoroughly. I think it would do a lot of good for the purpose we all have basically in mind, and no doubt there will be consultation through the usual channels towards that end. When we come to that debate, and the noble Earl has considered the situation and the statement in a little more detail, I very much doubt whether he will in fact make a speech in the tone in which he has spoken to-day. I would simply say that there is a great deal of preparatory work to be done. My right honourable friend proposes to ask Lord Rochdale and his colleagues to start work on an outline national plan without delay and thereafter to refine it in detail. It will be my right honourable friend's object from now on to ensure as far as possible that all major developments that take place are leading towards a sound national pattern. The point is that we are somewhat behind the progress made by other nations in this respect and I 428 think that, far from shuffling along, the proposals are likely to act as a stimulus to the port authorities, as the noble Lord who leads the Liberal Party mentioned, and not as a brake, as the noble Earl sees it.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am much obliged, but perhaps we had better wait to see what happens to the scheme at Bristol as to whether that can be borne out in fact. I would remind the noble Lord that the Government have been in office long over eleven years, and it is about time something was done.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, may I ask the Minister whether, in view of the very drastic recommendation of the Rochdale Report in regard to South Wales ports, a high-powered Welsh representative will be placed on this advisory committee? May I also ask him, with reference to Milford Haven and its special considerations, whether his right honourable friend will consult the Minister for Welsh Affairs?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I cannot say one way or the other about the high-powered Welsh representative, but I know my right honourable friend proposes to consult as quickly as possible with the noble Viscount, Lord Rochdale, as to what should be the proper composition of this committee. Would the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, repeat his second question?
§ LORD OGMOREMy second question was whether, in addition to the list of Ministers which the noble Lord's right honourable friend proposes to consult, the Secretary of State for Scotland and so on, he will also consult the Minister for Welsh Affairs, particularly with regard to Milford Haven.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, I am sure he will do that, because he intends to carry out further consultation with all interested parties, not only Ministers. The ones I mentioned are those with statutory responsibilities in regard to certain ports.