§ 2.26 p.m.
§ THE EARL OF KINNOULLMy 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 whether they consider the decision by the British Hovercraft Corporation to dismiss part of their design team on Hovercraft development is really in the national interest; and whether they were consulted beforehand.]
§ THE PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HOUSING AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT (LORD KENNET)My Lords, the British Hovercraft Corporation's decision to dismiss a number of men arises from their need to make some economies following the cuts in defence programmes. The Corporation plans to concentrate its design facilities at Cowes and to close 386 the design office at Itchen, which formally belonged to Vickers, now a partner in the Corporation. The Minister of Technology was not consulted beforehand. He hopes that arrangements can be made to employ some of the dismissed staff in the new younger firms entering the hovercraft industry.
§ THE EARL OF KINNOULLMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that reply, may I ask whether he would not agree that in an age when the Government are exhorting us to sell British technology abroad it seems somewhat contrary to that idea when one of the highest projects of the British aircraft industry is curtailing its design team through lack of development contracts? Can the noble Lord advise us what market studies the Government have assisted in with regard to British hovercraft?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, there are several firms in this industry, and the fact that one of them—the first and the biggest—reduces its design team does not necessarily mean that there is any loss in the total design potential of the industry. The studies which are going forward into various hovercraft projects are rather numerous, and if the noble Lord agrees I will let him know about that later.
§ THE EARL OF KINNOULLMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether the BH 7 project is in any way in danger of delay as a result of these dismissals?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, originally an order was placed for studies into two types of BH 7 hovercraft. One figured as a Naval patrol craft and the other as an Army craft. The Ministry of Defence have recently let it be known that there is no need for the Army version because of our early withdrawal from Asia, but the Naval version will go forward.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, in view of the wide applications of air cushion vehicles, tracked and otherwise, and of the strong competition existing now in France, particularly from the Bertin organisation, would the noble Lord not agree that it is essential that our design and research teams should not be diminished in any way whatsoever; particularly, too, in the field of 387 hovertrain development and also in the field of industrial handling equipment—in other words, hover-pallets—on account of their very high export potential to this country?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, it is all a question of trading off possibilities against wise and desirable investment in development research. One of the wheeled cushioncraft projects which was originally conceived turned out to have such high development costs that the Ministry and the industry are looking at another way of going about it.
§ LORD MERRIVALEMy Lords, the noble Lord mentioned "wheeled" hovercraft. It has no wheels. I am referring to the hovertrain development. The French have a lead, and it is important that we should catch up and pass them. As the noble Lord will be aware, when the French aerotrain, or hovertrain, was initially run at Gometz-le-Chatel, South of Paris, it attracted quite a number of interested parties from America and Japan.
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, I misunderstood the noble Lord. I thought he was referring to the wheeled vehicle which is under discussion. The hover-train is a separate question from the Question originally put, and I should be glad to have notice of the question.
§ LORD GRANVILLE OF EYEMy Lords, may I ask my noble friend whether he thinks that this is really the right way to treat such a highly successful design team in the aircraft industry: either partly to disband it or hand it to the United States on a plate? And will he ask his right honourable friend the Minister of Technology to look into this again very carefully, and perhaps make representations to Westland Aircraft, who I think are the controlling company, to see whether the team can be kept together for future projects?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, my right honourable friend the Minister of Technology has disbanded nothing. If one firm finds that it has to stand down a certain number of research and development people, that is the firm's decision. There is no question of handing anything to anybody on a plate, and there is no particular reason to suppose that any 388 of these men will be lost to the British hovercraft industry.
§ LORD WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, is my noble friend satisfied that in this development the manufacturing methods match up to the technological innovation?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, that also is a rather different question and I should like notice of it.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, sharing the concern expressed around the House, I would ask the noble Lord whether he can assure us, in advance of the imminent Defence White Paper, that the feasibility study for a large ocean-going hovercraft with a very important potential military application is going forward?
§ LORD KENNETMy Lords, I cannot anticipate the Defence White Paper, but the hovership study, if that is the one to which the noble Lord is referring, is not being pursued, mainly because of cuts in the defence expenditure. I should, of course, point out to the House that there are various kinds of hoverships, and the fact that one concept is not to be pursued does not mean that others are not to be.
EARL JELLICOEMy Lords, we shall of course await what is said in the Defence White Paper, but I hope the noble Lord will recognise that what he has just said is a matter of very deep concern to those of us interested in our maritime defence capabilities.