§ 3.41 p.m.
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, may I ask your Lordships' leave to interrupt the proceedings for a moment because, with your Lordships' permission, I will now repeat a statement on Port Organisation which is being made in another place by my right honourable friend the Minister of Transport:
"I asked the National Ports Council last year to advise me on the future of the Ports in the Forth Estuary and the Bristol Channel. I hope they will be able to let me have their reports on these particular questions shortly. In the meantime, they have told me that they have found it impracticable to consider organisation in these two areas without at the same time coming to a provisional conclusion about estuarial organisation generally, with particular reference to the future of the British Transport Docks Board.
"The Council have now reported to me their conclusions on these questions of principle—
First, the Council are satisfied that in general their national plan should be based on a limited number of major port authorities, in most cases on an estuarial basis, on the lines proposed by the Rochdale Committee. The organisation and ownership of these new authorities may well follow varying patterns depending on what is best suited to the area. But they recognise that there will continue to be a number of independent medium-sized and smaller ports with important functions to fulfil.
454 Second, certain of these major groupings should be under the control of the British Transport Docks Board. In these cases methods will be worked out to secure full consultation and co-operation between the Board and local interests.
"I told the House on July 10 last year that the Government accepted in principle the general idea of estuarial or regional groupings wherever likely to promote greater efficiency. In most cases these groupings will be brought about by harbour reorganisation schemes in accordance with the Harbours Act. Detailed proposals will of course have to be considered on their merits in accordance with the procedures laid down in the Act. I have asked the Council to go ahead on the lines they propose. But I have made it clear, in view of my responsibilities as Minister under the Harbours Act, that I am not forming any opinion in advance about any particular amalgamation scheme.
"I welcome the Council's proposal that the Docks Board should continue as a permanent feature of the ports industry. The Board has achieved a major success since its establishment under the Transport Act of 1962. In some areas the Council's proposals for estuarial reorganisation may mean the loss by the Board of certain ports. In other areas, where the Board is already the predominant dock authority, the proposals may involve the assumption of wider responsibilities.
"So much for general principles. To-day I can only speak about one particular case, that of the ports of Bristol and Newport. The Council have told me that they see no advantage in proceeding with any amalgamation of these two ports. I accept this conclusion."
My Lords, that is the statement.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am greatly obliged to the noble Lord, Lord Chesham, for giving us this statement. I listened to it—I had the advantage of looking at it beforehand—with rather mixed feelings. I think there is a little contradiction here and there. However, having got over the first organisational difficulties, this Committee which the 455 Minister has set up has now come to a conclusion on how it is going to consider the matter and it is to go on looking at the question of estuarial as well as other types of organisation. Then, at the end of the Statement, it transpires that it has made a decision at any rate about the Bristol Channel which is final and decisive—namely, that there is to be no amalgamation on an estuarial basis between Newport and Bristol.
Having been brought up in Bristol for many years in my youth—something like eighteen years—I personally think that is a wise decision. I know Bristol. Bristol has a municipally owned dock organisation. It is the only one of its kind in the country owned in that way. It has been extraordinarily successful. I would have hesitated long at any time to want to see it placed under some estuarial organisation which would not know half so much about the matter as the Bristol City Corporation do, with decades of experience. So I greatly welcome the last part of the Statement. But I just cannot yet understand how the other wanderings to be conducted through these inquiries are going on; and how far the example of the decision for the Bristol Channel is likely to be effective elsewhere.
§ LORD OGMOREMy Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Chesham, for repeating this statement to us to-day. I, too, should like to welcome the decision, which the Minister has taken on the recommendation of the Council, not to proceed with the amalgamation of Newport and Bristol. From what I know of the situation, I am quite sure that that is the right decision to take, and I am quite certain that it will be warmly received in South Wales. So far as the future is concerned, may I ask the Minister whether he will recommend to his right honourable friend that, before taking any decision about future amalgamations affecting South Wales, he will have regard to the fact that in the next year or so there are to be fast motor roads between South Wales and London and the Midlands, and that this may affect the ports in South Wales to a great extent?
§ LORD CHESHAMMy Lords, on the whole, I must be grateful to the noble Earl and to the noble Lord for what they have said about this statement. Of 456 course, when schemes are proposed to my right honourable friend he will take into consideration just the kind of factor that the noble Lord, Lord Ogmore, has put forward, as well as other factors which may bear upon them. Although, of necessity, I have had to speak in terms of principle only with regard to the estuarial and regional groupings—they can be spoken of only in principle—it is a fact, which I do not think has really been inconsistent, that this negative information, if I may call it that, about Bristol and Newport should be taken at this stage because of the great interest, and to some extent anxiety, that the matter of Bristol, in particular, and also Newport has caused locally. In fact, the noble Earl stressed to us the importance of this, and I thought it only proper that this piece of information, negative though it may be, should be put before the House as soon as possible.
§ EARL ALEXANDER OF HILLSBOROUGHMy Lords, I am much obliged. This gives me the opportunity to say that I also welcome the decision to continue the National Docks Board.