HL Deb 02 February 1966 vol 272 cc365-7

2.38 p.m.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government what information, if any, they had received from the Gas Council and the Area Gas Boards that justified (in the case of gas) the following statement on page 119 of the National Plan (Cmnd. 2764):— There are now adequate supplies of all fuels except for limited shortages of electrical capacity to meet peak demands in unusually cold spells, and for shortages of some types of solid smokeless fuels in certain regions."]

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, my right honourable friend was informed during 1965, in the course of his regular annual review of the gas industry's development programme, of the estimated peak demands for gas in cold weather, and of the industry's planned investment, which appeared adequate to meet those demands.

LORD CONESFORD

My Lords, may I thank the Minister for his Answer and ask him these two questions? Is he satisfied that the evidence given to his right honourable friend by the industry justified this very optimistic statement in the National Plan; and, if so, does he still believe that these words are true?

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, the answer is, Yes, to both questions.

LORD MOLSON

My Lords, if the Minister was satisfied that the planned investment was adequate to meet the case, what was the justification for the Prime Minister's suggestion that the failure of the gas supplies was due to faulty planning on the part of the late Conservative Government?

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, all my right honourable friend the Prime Minister said was that, if there was not sufficient investment in the gas industry, and if it took five years to build a power station, and from two to two and a half years to build a gas station, that was outside the period of this Government's responsibility of fifteen months. May I make this statement equally? In so far as the programme was concerned, as approved and put in hand by the previous Government, the contractors providing the plant in that programme were behind hand in the dates of handing over producing plant to the Gas Board.

LORD MOLSON

Let me be quite clear. Are we now hearing that the programme was entirely adequate and that the planning was entirely adequate, but that it was the failure on the part of the contractors to deliver the equipment on time which was responsible for the breakdown?

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, there is no simple answer, Yes or No, to these problems. If in fact the weather we have had during the last ten days had been operating when this plant broke down, there would have been, perhaps, a little shedding, but no failure or withdrawal of gas. It was in fact the coincidence of the extreme cold weather, plus the failure of the plant, which brought this about.

LORD BLYTON

My Lords, is my noble friend aware that the Select Committee on Nationalised Industries stated in their Report, that, with an expenditure of £31¼million, a gas grid could have been put into operation which would have linked all the Area Boards; and if that had been done the breakdown would never have happened because surplus gas would have been transported from other regions to where plants were out of order?

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, to an extent my noble friend's statement is absolutely correct. But, in fairness, I would say this: there had been established a methane grid, and to their credit every other Gas Board (let us remember that there are twelve in number, and in this period of time it was only in the case of one that we had a problem) which was connected to the methane grid—eight in number—voluntarily gave up its share of the methane supply in this most difficult period of production to enable the West Midlands Gas Board to carry on a service greater than otherwise they would have been able to do.

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, in view of the fact that the last few weeks have shown that the information given in the National Plan, as stated in my noble friend's Question, was completely incorrect, can the noble Lord say what steps Her Majesty's Government are taking to see that these failures do not occur again?

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, I do not know whether the word "protest" is the correct word to use, but I would say that it was not incorrect. If the noble Earl can show me where the information is incorrect, I will try to deal with it. The problem was that the capacity, in the load to be taken, was there. It was unfortunate that, coinciding with the extreme cold weather, there was a plant failure. A plant failure is not the fault of the Gas Board. I am not going to apportion blame. Equally, one may say, as I have said in reply to the previous noble Lord, that in fact if this milder weather had been operative at the time of the breakdown, they would still have got through.

EARL FERRERS

My Lords, the noble Lord did ask me to point out where the fault was. If he would look at the Question, the quotation from the National Plan says: There are now adequate supplies of all fuels … Would he not agree that there was not an adequate supply?

LORD LINDGREN

My Lords, there were adequate supplies; but, unfortunately, the plant broke down and did not produce them.

Forward to