HL Deb 09 February 1989 vol 503 cc1656-8

3.6 p.m.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter asked Her Majesty's Government:

What action they are taking to enable trawlers and other fishing craft based in Grimsby to land their catches at that port without interference.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Social Security (Lord Skelmersdale)

My Lords, although there have in the past been difficulties for trawlers and other fishing craft in the landing of their catches at Grimsby, I understand that there are at present no operational problems in this respect.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, in that case, can my noble friend give an assurance that there will not in the future be cases such as there have been in the recent past of trawlers coming in with cargos of fish being forbidden, because this is a dock labour port, to land them themselves and being forced to take their rapidly decaying fish to other ports? Can we have an assurance that that will not happen again?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, regrettably I cannot give that assurance. Clearly the operation of a port is in the hands of the port authorities and the other firms which work in that port. I do not think that I can add anything to that answer.

Lord Mellish

My Lords, is the Minister aware that that is a backhanded way of trying to say, "Let's get rid of the dock labour scheme"? If that is the intention of the noble Lord, then let him get up and say so and not use Grimsby, or anywhere else. Further, is the Minister also aware that while the dock labour scheme involved 48,000 people at one time, today there are only 9,000 people involved?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am well aware that there has been a substantial reduction since, I think, 1947, when the dock labour scheme started. However, I am sure that it would also interest the House to know that, despite the scheme, ports where it is operating are generally profitable and manning levels, as the noble Lord pointed out, have tightened, though there is still scope for further progress.

Lord Boyd-Carpenter

My Lords, perhaps my noble friend will inform the noble Lord, Lord Mellish, that I have often suggested the abolition of the dock labour scheme and that sometimes it is helpful when so doing to draw attention to particular examples where it is causing mischief.

Lord Mellish

My Lords, I still think it is nonsense.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am not sure that I should be an intermediary in the way that has been suggested by my noble friend.

Baroness Turner of Camden

My Lords, is the Minister aware that matters at Grimsby are currently the subject of court actions, with injunctions having been issued and appeals now outstanding? Therefore, would it not be better if such issues were left to the decisions of the court rather than to discussions in your Lordships' House?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am well aware of the sub judice rules and I do not believe that any of the answers I have given have broken them in any way.

Lord Campbell of Alloway

My Lords, arising out of this Question, can my noble friend say what the Government's attitude is towards the future of the dock labour scheme, as that seems to be what is behind the Question?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, only three weeks ago my right honourable friend the Prime Minister made it clear that she had nothing to add to earlier statements that there are no present plans to change the operation of the scheme. That remains the position.

Lord Rochester

My Lords, will the noble Lord agree that before the possible abolition of the dock labour scheme there should be full consultation with interested parties?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, if I may say so, that is the most hypothetical question I have heard in recent weeks. There is really nothing to consult about. As I have made clear, there are no present plans to change the scheme, and the views of employers, users and unions are, as we all know, very well known.

Viscount St. Davids

My Lords, the law has regrettably given certain people a monopoly to do certain things. Will my noble friend comment as to whether there should be a right not to do certain things? Surely where a monopoly gives someone the right and the duty is not carried out, someone has the right to step in. A monopoly should not be negative.

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, how wide is the ocean, how deep is the sea? I have no comment to make on the noble Viscount's question.

Lord Grimond

My Lords, perhaps I may refer to the original Question with which I have a great deal of sympathy. Will the Government make it clear that if fish is diverted from one port to another, it is not necessarily in a state of rapid decay, as the noble Lord described it?

Lord Skelmersdale

My Lords, I am glad to be able to confirm to the noble Lord, Lord Grimond, that the 16th century proverb that fish and communities stink in three days is now somewhat out of date. If industrial action makes it impossible to land fish, there is clearly a risk that some of the catch will go to waste. However, there is modern cold storage aboard ships which helps to reduce wastage.