§ 3.13 p.m.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy 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 how many concrete platforms are now believed to be under construction for North Sea oilfields, how many of these are being built in the United Kingdom and for which oilfields are both categories of platform being built.
§ The MINISTER of STATE, DEPARTMENT of ENERGY (Lord Balogh)My Lords, seven concrete platforms are under construction or on order for oilfields in the United Kingdom sector of the North Sea. Three are being built in the United Kingdom for the Brent, Cormorant and Ninian fields. The remaining four platforms, two for the Brent field and one each for the Beryl and Dunlin fields, are being constructed abroad. A concrete platform for the Stratfjord field in the Norwegian sector is also being constructed abroad. One of the two concrete platforms required for the Frigg field, which is gas, is being built in the United Kingdom—I thought that I would add the number for gas fields, too.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, while thanking the noble Lord for that informative and helpful reply, and in particular for his last point concerning gas which I forgot to put in the Question, may I ask him whether or not he would think it is the case that further platform orders in respect of the smaller fields are being delayed while the companies concerned reappraise their investment programmes due to uncertainty about the tax regime to which they will be exposed?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, there are a number of reasons for the delay, including delays in the oil companies' appraisal 662 drilling owing to very bad weather. This year was by far the worst ever, as we all know. The effect has been to turn what would have been a peak in orders into a plateau extending into 1976. This is to the advantage both of the platform fabricators, because it spreads the ordering, and of the United Kingdom. We have had time to develop our own sites, whereas a year ago the Norwegians were very much in advance of us.
§ Lord ORR-EWINGMy Lords, is the noble Lord aware that the longer these projects take to come to fruition the greater the effect of inflation at the present rate and the greater the shortage of cash for the companies concerned? Would he give an assurance that such organisations as Finance for Industry, FFI, are possibly to lend money to enhance and quicken the development of these important projects for our nation?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, I am sorry that I shall not be able to answer the second part of the question because I have not prepared for it. So perhaps the noble Lord will put down a further Question, or I can communicate with him directly in writing, just as he wishes. So far as the first part of the question is concerned, the noble Lord must have seen the Statement by my right honourable friend in another place in which he explained our policy in regard to the weaker companies. The Government have of course given certain guarantees; they have intervened in the case of a larger company which got into difficulties. We are doing our very best to ensure that no financial troubles should aggravate a situation which has been, as I said, aggravated by the weather.
§ Lord LLOYD of KILGERRANMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord whether he is in a position to say if the eight rigs to which he referred in his Answer are for exploratory development work or for more permanent siting?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, I shall have to answer this question from memory and therefore I would not want to be dogmatic about it, but I think they are for both purposes.
§ Lord WYNNE-JONESMy Lords, can my noble friend assure us that the plateau in platform building is now becoming a rising incline?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, for the moment I cannot give that assurance. At the moment if I were an oil company director, I should certainly try to frighten the Government into further undue concessions because I should be acting as a trustee of my shareholders.
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, may I ask the noble Lord the Leader of the House a question on a point of order? The noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, has a Question on the Order Paper which has not been asked. Would he observe that Her Majesty's Government are being asked to take action on the basis of a Times report and a report contained in a book? Clearly (I am sure my noble friend will agree), Her Majesty's Government can have no responsibility whatever for every article that appears in every newspaper in this country, and I do not—
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, I put the question to my noble friend: has he considered the implications of the Question standing in the name of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone? I am sure he would agree that the Question itself is in order in technical terms. But what possible responsibility does he consider have the Government for reports in The Times and reports in a book, and where does it take us? Does it mean that every Member of this House is entitled to raise questions here arising from any article which appears in any newspaper or any book? Would it not be a matter for consideration that Her Majesty's Government should consider whether it should not be that Questions on the Order Paper—
§ Lord WIGGMy Lords, I am asking the noble Lord the Leader of the House whether he will consider the advisability of asking the House to agree that Questions placed on the Order Paper should in some way, however remote, have something to do with the responsibility of the Government.
§ Lord DERWENTMy Lords, before the noble Lord the Leader of the House answers, may I ask whether we are not still dealing with the Question following the Question to which the noble Lord, 664 Lord Wigg, has referred? I believe that a noble Lord on this side wanted to ask a supplementary question about oil.
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, I think that was so. But the noble Lord, Lord Wigg, put a question to me and your Lordships permitted him so to do. This seems in fact to have moved us on to another matter. The question that the noble Lord, Lord Wigg, has asked me is whether I should give thought to the Question that is on the Order Paper in the name of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone. I would say to the House that he is perfectly entitled—it is within Standing Orders—to raise that as subject matter. So far as my position is concerned, it is in no way different from that of any other Member of your Lordships' House. It is for the House itself to decide whether a Question or Motion should be on the Order Paper, and whether it should be put. My position is no different.
In regard to trying to lay down tighter rules about the direction of a question or a Motion, I am quite willing to look at it; but I recognise that your Lordships' House has few Rules and we do remarkably well as a consequence. I myself would not wish to tighten the Rules unnecessarily if only to place a restriction upon your Lordships' House. I will look at the matter, but I have to say to my noble friend that the Question which the noble Lord, Lord Hailsham of Saint Marylebone, put on the Order Paper is in my view within the Rules of your Lordships' House and I think we should leave it there.
§ The Earl of LAUDERDALEMy Lords, would it be possible to return to the matter about which we were directing questions? May I therefore ask the noble Lord who was good enough to answer the Question which I put down whether or not he would agree that although the weather factor is undoubtedly one that has delayed investment appraisals in the North Sea, there is also the fact of uncertainty about the fiscal regime to be accepted? Would it not be well to recognise that both factors are relevant to the matter in hand?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, I should have thought that the noble Earl would 665 have understood my tactful allusion to the problems of company directors and their actions. So far as the taxation problem is concerned, I should have thought that I am the last person not to be very worried about the length of time it took us; but I can assure the noble Earl that the time which was taken was in order to have extended discussions with the oil companies. It is a unique sort of tax, and therefore it poses exceedingly difficult problems of principle to the Inland Revenue. We wish to sup-port the industry as much as possible within the aims laid down in the Manifesto.
§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYALMy Lords, would the noble Lord accept that the Government's proposals for participation are creating even more uncertainty due to undermining the borrowing base of the oil companies; and could he tell the House when the uncertainties regarding both participation and the tax regime are likely to be resolved?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, I am somewhat astonished by the noble Lord's assertion that participation should cause difficulties on finance. On many other things it may cause difficulties and misgivings, but so far as finance is concerned it is obvious, as my right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has said, that (1) the oil companies will financially be in the same position as before, and (2) their cash flow may be enormously increased. So the participation point, when the noble Lord thinks it over, is not one which stands up. So far as the taxation point is concerned, we are only too glad to have the opinions of the oil companies, and I think noble Lords will find that in the end our reticence to impose premature taxation has paid off.
§ Lord STRATHCONA and MOUNT ROYALMy Lords, I welcome the noble Lord's assertion of all these noble platitudes but, with respect, he has not answered my question as to when he expects these negotiations to come to fruition.
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, I apologise. My right honourable friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster—I find almost inalienable difficulties in pronouncing that title—said the day before 666 yesterday in New York that he hoped to announce the tax date before the end of this month, and as soon as the tax date is announced and therefore the structure of the financial situation is clear, I think we shall then begin to make progress with the negotiations on those oilfields the owners of which have not yet offered us participation.
§ Lord LEE of NEWTONMy Lords, is my noble friend satisfied with the degree of work on platforms now coming to British firms? Is there any effort made when squares are being allocated in the North Sea to do a little refined blackmail, in the sense that those American firms which agree to place their orders with British firms would perhaps get priority in the squares they require?
§ Lord BALOGHMy Lords, my noble friend surely means not "blackmail" but "persuasion".
§ Lord BALFOUR of INCHRYEMy Lords, perhaps the House will allow me to revert to the question raised by the noble Lord, Lord Wigg, which I think is a matter of some importance. It is not new to the House. Some of your Lordships may remember that I raised the same point when the noble Lord, Lord Brockway, was sitting on this side of the House and asked Her Majesty's Government of the day whether they would comment upon certain Press reports of, I think, some African country? It seems to me that if the Rules of the House, which we ourselves make, are so wide as to allow this practice, which in another place would certainly not be allowed, surely the remedy lies with the Government and that the Minister may say, "Her Majesty's Government have no responsibility for this. Therefore I do not answer the question".
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, the noble Lord is quite right. It is quite open to any noble Lord, within the Rules of the House to put down a Question, and for the Government to decide whether they wish to reply to it, although in practice they do. If I may say so, I should like to consider whether or not the Question on the Order Paper, is for the Government. If the noble Lord is intending to put down a Question on the matter we shall have to deal with it when it is put. However, I think I ought to say that on my reading of it, the Question on the 667 Order Paper is within the Rules of your Lordships' House.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, is my noble friend aware—
§ Lord ABERDAREMy Lords, since I am acting as Leader of the Opposition, may I say a few words. My Lords, I think we have already passed this Question which was not asked, and we are quite out of order in starting a debate about it. I would suggest, if I may, that this matter be referred to the Procedure Committee rather than it be debated at the moment.
§ Lord SHINWELLMy Lords, that is precisely the point I wished to put before the noble Lord opposite intervened. It seems to me that we are now violating the Rules of the House. If there is any question of procedure to be raised it must be done in the normal fashion, either by approaching the Chairman of Committees or the Clerks of the House, or by putting a Question on the Order Paper. If I may say with great respect, when my noble friend the Leader of the House replied to my noble friend Lord Wigg, he was violating the Rules of the House. He should have ignored the question.
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, so long as my noble friend allows me to treat him in the same way as he suggests I should have treated my other noble friend, I will accept his advice. My Lords, I suspect we are making rather a mountain out of a very small molehill. I will certainly consider whether it should go to the Procedure Committee, but I would suggest to your Lordships that we now have other things to do of far greater importance.
§ Lord SLATERMy Lords, can my noble friend—
§ Several Noble Lords: Order!
§ Lord SLATERMy Lords, can my noble friend say whether, once a Question appears on the Order Paper and the Member of this Chamber is not in attendance to ask his Question, there is a set period of time in the order of procedure before such Question can be repeated on the Order Paper?
§ Lord SHEPHERDMy Lords, everything is entirely up to your Lordships' House. It is for your Lordships' House to decide whether a Question should remain on the Order Paper or whether it should be put. There is no time limit so far as I am aware, other than that within which it becomes finished when it has been dealt with by your Lordships' House. I suggest with great respect to all that we should now move to the next business.