HC Deb 20 June 1977 vol 933 cc382-4W
Mr. Hoyle

asked the Secretary of State for Industry (1) when the Economic Development Council for the motor manufacturing industry last met; and what representations there have been about future meetings;

(2) when the Economic Development Council for the motor manufacturing industry will have its next meeting;

(3) how many people are involved in servicing the Economic Development Council for the motor manufacturing industry; and what has been the cost to date;

(4) who is responsible for calling a meeting of the Economic Development Council for the motor manufacturing industry and who are the members;

(5) if the Economic Development Council for the motor manufacturing industry will formulate an overall coherent programme for the industry.

Mr. Les Huckfield

I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to the Motor Industry Tripartite Group. The group is chaired by my right hon. Friend and includes the heads of the four major manufacturing companies in the United Kingdom—British Leyland, Ford, Chrysler and Vauxhall—and the leaders of the two main trade unions in the industry—the Transport and General Workers Union and the Amalgamated Union of Engineering Workers. The group meets as and when it is necessary and dates are settled by mutual agreement. The officials of the appropriate sponsorship division in my Department act as the secretariat for the Tripartite Group. It is not possible to distinguish in terms of cost between their work for the group and their other duties.

The Government's policy towards the motor industry is set out in the White Paper on the British Motor Industry (Cmnd. 6377). The function of the group is to consider the issues identified in that White Paper and the White Paper on

Cash Block Description of Expenditure Cash Limit Forecast Outturn Difference
DI1 Pay and general administrative expenses 55.2 51.3 3.9
DI2 Regional and industrial policy and research and development 108.1 99.4 8.7
DI3 Assistance to shipbuilding 37.9 15.6 22.3

There were only two cases where spending on a particular programme fell well short of the cash limit. A substantial underspend on cash block DI3 arose mainly because delays to the legislation nationalising shipbuilding held back the Government's measures for assisting the industry. A large part of the underspend on cash block DI2 was accounted for by my Department's programme for the provision of land and buildings, where there were unforeseen difficulties in obtaining

Industrial Strategy (Cmnd. 6315), in so far as they relate to the industry, and the action that needs to be taken by Government, management, and unions to secure viable, substantial, and internationally competitive industry in the 1980s.