HL Deb 03 May 1971 vol 318 cc4-7

2.41 p.m.

LORD BROWN

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

[The Question was as follows:

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will reconsider the curtailment of financial support given to overseas trade export missions which has already led to the postponement of 61 such missions.]

THE MINISTER WITHOUT PORTFOLIO (LORD DRUMALBYN)

My Lords, the Government have considered this matter very carefully. We have concluded that we should keep expenditure within the proposed financial provision for 1971–72, and accept that this means a curtailment of financial support for outward missions after June 1.

LORD BROWN

My Lords, while thanking the Minister for that reply, may I ask two supplementary questions? Is the noble Lord aware that hundreds of companies, which had assumed that there was little market for their products in certain overseas countries, were attracted in the first place to investigate by the generous terms made available by the old Board of Trade via the B.N.E.C.?

Is the noble Lord acquainted with the fact that these initial visits lead in many cases to the establishment of substantial exports which would not otherwise have come about?

LORD DRUMALBYN

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

LORD BROWN

My Lords, would the Minister not agree that, simply because the Government inherited a balance of payments surplus from the last Government of nearly £600 million, it is very dangerous to whittle away the procedures which helped industry achieve such results?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, we are not whittling away the support which is given to missions. What we are doing, and what we have always done, is to exercise a certain amount of selectivity in missions. The fact is that the amount available this year is about £100,000 less than was available last year.

LORD HOY

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the Government decision over this has been greeted in Scotland as absolutely intolerable? Will he not look at this question again to permit the Glasgow deputation to China at least to meet their planned needs in the near future?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, I do not think it will be possible to go into the merits of individual applications in the form of question and answer. Undoubtedly, some missions planned or being planned for this year may have to be postponed to next year.

LORD HOY

My Lords, is the noble Lord aware that this Glasgow one had been planned, many businesses in Glasgow have already been put to considerable expenditure, and only the decision of the Government has prevented it from taking place? In these circumstances would he not ask the Government to look at this question once more?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, I think I am right in saying that those missions which were to go out in the following year have already been told so. I do not think it would be justifiable, because of one particular mission, to exceed the expenditure which is being put forward.

LORD BYERS

My Lords, is it not extremely short-sighted for the sake of £100,000 to postpone something which will have an important effect on our balance of payments? Does the noble Lord consider this to be the right perspective?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, it is inevitable with missions arising from different parts of the country, whether industrial or chamber of commerce missions, that there has to be a certain amount of selectivity exercised in the choice of those to be assisted in any year.

LORD BYERS

The noble Lord has not said that it was a question of selectivity alone; he said that the money had run out. Why not offer another £100,000 and get these people on to the road?

LORD BROWN

Is the noble Lord implying that all these 61 missions which have been postponed have been postponed on the grounds of selectivity which, as the noble Lord knows, means that the B.N.E.C. does not think them worthwhile? Is that the inference of the noble Lord's answer?

LORD DRUMALBYN

No, my Lords. There are two factors: the general factor of selectivity, which simply means that every mission which makes an application will not necessarily get support; and there is the factor of the estimate for this year.

LORD SHEPHERD

My Lords, if we put down a Question for Written Answer, will the noble Lord undertake to give the names of the proposed missions and of those missions which have been turned down? Will the noble Lord, if he can, give an estimate of what has been the sort of average export results of previous missions?

LORD DRUMALBYN

My Lords, with regard to the second part of the supplementary question, I think that this would be extremely difficult to do because one cannot tell what has been the exact effect of a mission. With regard to the first part, I shall look at it; but I should prefer not to give an undertaking. The names of the missions that are going forward are usually published but I do not want to give rise to false hopes in this matter.