§ 3.55 p.m.
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, with your Lordships' permission, I should like to repeat a Statement that has just been made in another place by the Deputy Secretary of State for Defence. The Statement is as follows:
"During the last seven years, nine Royal Ordnance Factories, apart from Woolwich, have been closed in order to bring capacity into line with the reduction in requirements for munitions. There is still, however, a substantial surplus of engineering and gun making capacity in the two Royal Ordnance Factories equipped to do this sort of work, namely Woolwich and Nottingham.
"In order to keep both these factories running economically we should need to attract suitable new work to the value of something like £7 million a year for some years ahead. While it is the Government's aim to attract work into the Royal Ordnance Factories, consistent with their primary purpose of producing munitions for the Forces, I cannot foresee that an additional steady Lord of this magnitude of work suitable for these factories is likely to be forthcoming.
"It is clear, therefore, that our capacity for this kind of work must be reduced. Nottingham is the more modern of the two factories and for that reason more economical to run. Moreover, its capacity is more in line with foreseeable requirements. I am therefore forced to the conclusion that it is right to retain the Royal Ordnance Factory at Nottingham and that the decision to close the Royal Ordnance Factory at Woolwich cannot be reversed. The saving from this concentration of capacity is estimated at upwards of £1 million per annum.
"During the course of the investigation it has been represented that the 664 Royal Ordnance Factories have in the past not been fairly treated in the allocation to them of work for which they are equipped to produce. Although I am satisfied that no change in policy could bring additional work to the factories on a scale which would justify retention of both Nottingham and Woolwich, it is important that the excellent facilities and skilled labour available in the Royal Ordnance Factories generally should be used to the maximum advantage. I am therefore putting in hand a departmental investigation into the way in which work is allocated to the factories. An investigation will also be made into the possibility of attracting contracts from sources outside the defence field. This investigation will be undertaken by my honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Army who will consult with representatives of trade unions and employers as well as with other Government Departments.
"I should explain that this announcement is being made now, at this unseasonable moment, in response to the need to remove uncertainty about the future of the Royal Ordnance Factory at Woolwich. The trade union representatives asked especially that this uncertainty should be removed as soon as possible, and though the confirmation of the decision to close Woolwich will be a disappointment to them, in the wider field of Royal Ordnance Factory activity as a whole it will have the advantage of dispelling certain anxieties.
"I should add that this decision is not going to result in immediate discharges. The pattern is simply that the process of rundown, halted during the examination of the problem, will be resumed. The necessity to discharge will depend upon a number of factors difficult to forecast but is unlikely to arise before the end of winter."
My Lords, that is the Statement.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for repeating this Statement, and I would straight away agree with what he has said about the desirability of removing uncertainty 665 in this matter, even at this unseasonable time. But, of course, I cannot refrain from remarking that this uncertainty would not have arisen but for this rather unnecessary review. May I, in any event, congratulate the Government on their wisdom in thus confirming the decision which was taken by the late Government? May I also express the hope that this conversion will form a precedent for the other decisions which the Government will shortly be taking in the course of their defence review?
Having said that, may I ask one further supplementary question? Can the noble Lord assure us that the London County Council, as a result of this decision, will be receiving the full windfall of land for housing purposes which they would have received under the late Government's decision?
§ LORD SHEPHERDMy Lords, I am most grateful for the response of the noble Earl. In regard to the review, I should have thought he would have accepted it as a necessary fact that a new Government should undertake a review of all its responsibilities. This was one which it felt bound to undertake, particularly in the light of the large number of men, who have given very loyal service, and who might well be in some difficulty by reason of loss of employment. Therefore, in the circumstances, we have decided that it is right that we should proceed. In regard to the second point., obviously housing is of major interest and a major priority in that area, and I assure the noble Lord that planning matters will be most carefully considered, both by the local authority and by the planning authority for the area.