Home Page

Column 609

House of Commons

Friday 22 May 1992

The House met at half-past Nine o'clock

PRAYERS

[Madam Speaker-- in the Chair ]

PETITION

Legal Aid (Criminal Cases)

9.35 am

Mr. John Fraser (Norwood) : I beg leave to present a petition on legal aid fees in criminal matters. I must declare an interest : I am a solicitor.

The background, which I shall describe briefly, is the erosion of coverage of legal aid, where legal advice and assistance was to be removed from asylum and immigration cases. Last year legal aid practitioners were offered an increase in their hourly rates of only 1 per cent., which, self- evidently, is much below the increase paid to anyone else. It is also against the background of a number of miscarriages of justice which have besmirched the British legal system.

The petition reads :

To the Honourable House of Commons of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland in Parliament assembled.

The humble Petition of the people of England and Wales sheweth that :

We wish to register strong protest at the Government's proposal to introduce fixed fees for legal aid in criminal cases. We wish to register strong protest at the proposed increase in legal aid fees of only 3 per cent. from April 1992. These proposals may cause solicitors to withdraw from the legal aid scheme and from duty solicitor schemes at courts and police stations, thereby increasing the likelihood of more cases of miscarriage of justice and reducing the people's entitlement to access to justice and to legal advice and representation.

Wherefore your Petitioners pray that your Honourable House delay the introduction of fixed fees until the Royal Commission on Justice has reported ; seek to reinforce the legal aid scheme and ensure its proper funding and further ensure that all lawyers who undertake legal aid work receive fair remuneration for their services to ensure proper access to justice for all.

The petition is supported by the signatures of about 32,000 people, mostly non-lawyers.

To lie upon the Table.

BILL PRESENTED

Sea Fish (Conservation)

Mr. Secretary Gummer, supported by Mr. Secretary Hunt, Mr. Secretary Lang and Secretary Sir Patrick Mayhew, presented a Bill to amend the law relating to licences under Sections 4 and 4A of the Sea Fish (Conservation) Act 1967 : And the same was read the First time ; and ordered to be read a Second time upon Tuesday 2 June and to be printed. [Bill 10.]

Column 610

MoD Establishment (Harrogate)

Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.-- [Mr. Wood.]

9.37 am

Mr. Robert Banks (Harrogate) : I am most grateful for this opportunity to raise a matter of very great importance to the town of Harrogate in my constituency and more especially to the people whose jobs depend on the Ministry of Defence establishment there. I am particularly grateful to see on the Treasury Bench my hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon (Mr. Curry) because a number of employees who are employed at the Ministry of Defence establishment live outside the boundaries of my constituency. I am grateful to him for finding time to be here for part of this debate.

My hon. Friends the Members for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) and for Calder Valley (Sir D. Thompson) have supported me in the efforts that I have been making to retain the Ministry of Defence establishment. They regret that they are unable to be here this morning, owing to their constituency commitments.

The establishment is commonly called the Ministry of Defence in St. George's road by local people in Harrogate. I recognise that its technical title is the Support Management Group, which is within the department of the Air Member for Supply and Organisation. It does not form part of the Procurement Executive, though part of its function is to undertake some procurement work.

All this sounds very confusing. It is even more confusing because it is bound up with the RAF Logistics organisation. None the less, the work at the Ministry of Defence establishment is important and recognised as crucial to the back-up for RAF aircraft. I appeal to the Minister to give departments and their tentacles rational and recognisable titles. More confusion arises from the appointment of two air commodores to operate command at the establishment. Some time ago we were delighted when the then Secretary of State for Defence, George Younger, made time to visit the establishment. I am most grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Lincoln (Mr. Carlisle) for the close interest that he took in the establishmnent when he was the Under-Secretary of State for Defence Procurement in the previous Parliament. The same can be said of my right hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. King), who, as Secretary of State, made it clear that he would look very closely at any proposals to move jobs from the north to the south. He emphasised to me that about 300 different moves are involved in the review process. I can understand the difficulties that my right hon. Friend the Minister experiences with so many hon. Members having different parts of the procurement division in their constituencies. Their natural inclination, like mine, is to ensure that their establishment stays where it is.

The review is entirely right and proper. Our defence commitments have been reduced by the changed circumstances of the world. There is no doubt that staff at the Ministry of Defence fully accept and understand that our forces must be scaled down to meet our reduced commitments. The reduction in defence expenditure is welcome as it will enable us to spend more on social priorities, but we must exercise prudent care in shaping our defence forces to ensure that we can respond to

Column 611

circumstances that we may not be able to foresee precisely. Circumstances change and we live in a world that is full of surprises and sometimes horrors.

Our role in NATO is enormously important. I have always fervently believed that NATO is the cornerstone of western defence and that it must remain so, particularly because of the link that it establishes with north America and Canada. I am sure that we shall have the opportunity on many occasions to restate the role of NATO and to emphasise the need to maintain our defences to ensure that we are not caught out.

Harrogate has enjoyed the presence of the Ministry of Defence for a long time. When the establishment came to Harrogate after the war, it quickly became part of the town. Employees soon were loyal to Harrogate and it is a posting which is favoured by mobile grades and by service men, who come and go. Some 1,250 civilians and 315 service men work at the establishment, which is the largest single employer in Harrogate. We have a number of employers involved in a diverse range of industries and commerce, but we are particularly proud of the long and important links that we have had with civil servants in the Ministry of Defence and other sections of government. The Ministry of Defence's buildings are outdated. Temporary and shortlisted buildings have withstood more than their fair test of time. I am arguing not for retention of the present site or occupation of present buildings but for keeping jobs in Yorkshire and in the vicinity of Harrogate.

A review conducted by the previous Labour Government proposed moving the establishment to Glasgow. We resisted that move and, thankfully, it was scuttled when we took office in 1979. Instead, staff were moved from Glasgow to Harrogate. I am eternally grateful to the Ministers who took that decision as it reinforced Harrogate's position and gave staff a sense of security about their long-term future.

The present review once again threatens to move the establishment from Harrogate. I hope that my right hon. Friend the Minister will say something about the review and its progress. I know that much has been done and is being done to reach a decision. It was originally to be made in the spring, but there was a delay and it was announced that it would be made in the early summer. Summer seems to be early this year, but I must press my right hon. Friend to accept that the uncertainty for civilian employees in the non-mobile grades is causing much anxiety. I hope that he will say today at least that consultation with the employees' organisations and unions will start as soon as possible once options have been decided. Consultation is most important. We are talking about the livelihoods of employees and their families, the education of their children and the arrangements that they have to make for where they live.

The review involves departments in Gloucestershire, London, RAF Brampton, near Huntingdon, RAF Wyton in Cambridgeshire and at High Wycombe. Conservative Members representing those areas are no doubt making pleas to retain the presence of the Ministry of Defence, in its various forms, in their areas. The locations that I have mentioned are all in the south, but the largest unit is the

Column 612

one in Harrogate. The cost of moving non- mobile grades must be taken into account and I hope that that will be underlined in the review.

We see ourselves in Harrogate as being very much in competition with RAF Wyton. Rumours fly around and people have the impression that there is a major competition between ourselves and RAF Wyton. I admire my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and if he wanted help I would give it to him unreservedly, but his majority is the largest in the country--36,230. I do not think that he needs the assistance of extra jobs for his constituency. We know, however, that he can stand on his own feet and on his own record.

My area has many military connections. HMS Forest Moor, a small and unknown branch of the Royal Navy, is in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon. It deals with communications in our area. The Army Apprentices college is on the boundary of my constituency and in that of my hon. Friend the Member for Skipton and Ripon. We are both overjoyed that it will be retained as a military establishment and will take on board the Junior Leaders Regiment. That is good news ; it keeps jobs in the area.

However, there are three services--the Navy, the Army and the RAF. The RAF presence in my constituency at the Ministry of Defence establishment completes the services representation. A variety of defence sites are therefore available. Even beyond the close boundaries of the Harrogate constituency there is RAF Linton-on-Ouse and the army bases at Catterick. I have no doubt that there is sufficient land, and there are buildings which could certainly be made available as a relocation point for the Ministry of Defence establishment. Will my right hon. Friend tell us how many sites have been considered in the review and where they are located in the Harrogate area?

The St. Georges road site is a valuable one and when the time comes to redevelop, I hope that priority will be given to commercial or office accommodation in order to retain jobs in the area. It is a prestigious point close to the centre of Harrogate and there are a number of uses to which the site could be put.

If one considers its national position, strategically Harrogate must offer the best solution as it is at the heart of the United Kingdom. It has excellent rail and road links, superb schools and an environment of unequalled quality. I do not doubt the enthusiasm of the people who are asked to move to Harrogate once they have seen and know the area.

Jobs are important to us. Jobs have recently been lost at National Power which last year announced that it would be making people redundant at its offices in Harrogate. Of course, that is to be regretted, but all thinking people understand that companies must make their own decisions. The record shows that in March 1990 there were 922 jobs at National Power in Harrogate. In March 1991 the number increased to 1,063 and at the end of March this year the number had fallen to 769. They are important jobs and I am delighted that National Power is retaining its offices in Harrogate even on a reduced basis.

ICI's research fibres division at Hornbeam park recently announced that it was closing down and that there would be 200 job losses as a result of the closure. ICI has had a long and historic connection with Harrogate. Over the years it expanded and then reduced its research fibres

Column 613

division. It has now made a rational decision and, as I said in relation to National Power, we of course regret the loss of jobs at that great company.

One good point is that many of the buildings vacated have been re-occupied by other smaller firms which have come to Harrogate and which provide jobs. Some of the offices have now become our college of art and technology.

Harrogate has an unemployment rate of 4.6 per cent. The figure is 8.4 per cent. in Leeds and 5.9 per cent. in York, so we are relatively lucky. We do not deny that, but we live in a competitive world and we must fight to get and to hold every job that we can. It is always our intention to encourage industry to expand and new companies to come to Harrogate and the surrounding areas, and that is one of Harrogate's great strengths.

Harrogate has been fortunate in that the Government whom I am proud to support have moved jobs from the London area to the north. Two departments of the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food are moving and the first --the central science laboratory--is due to relocate in 1996 to Sand Hutton in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Ryedale. Four hundred posts are due to be moved there and about 150 to 200 staff will have to be recruited locally, which is a plus. The move involves mainly scientists. Departments within the headquarters division of the Ministry dealing with pesticide safety, plant health, statistics, personnel, establishment work and finance will be located in York city centre in 1994. About 600 posts will be involved and 300 are expected to be recruited locally. The Department of Health is also moving staff from the south to Leeds. The move will involve the national health service management executive, more or less in its entirety. Between 1,100 and 1,200 posts are to be relocated. Support services are not being relocated but are being put out to contract, which is a good thing because it is thought that between 100 and 200 support service jobs will be created in the area for local people.

The Department of Social Security is also moving with the Department of Health and, in this case, the whole of the Benefits Agency is coming to Leeds. Seven hundred and ninety one posts are being moved to Leeds, including a range of executive and clerical grades together with senior management posts. The figure does not include support services which will add another 40 local jobs and thus create new jobs for local people.

It has been the Government's policy--rightly so--to decant jobs from the south, or from London, to the north so that there is a better balance of civil service jobs in the north. We value that and it would be a great pity --indeed, a tragedy--if that policy were reversed and a decision made to relocate the Ministry of Defence establishment in another part of the country.

We have a long and historical connection with the Ministry of Defence. We pride ourselves on the fact that our workers at the Ministry of Defence are dedicated, hard working and efficient. They are deeply rooted in the area as they have been there for many years. Their families are there and the sons of some employees now also work in the establishment so there is a family continuity. Above all, the establishment is our largest and, therefore, our most important and valued employer.

I plead with the Minister to ensure that we keep the Ministry of Defence jobs in Yorkshire and that the RAF retains its presence in the Harrogate area. We in the north will be ever grateful to the Ministry and to my right hon.

Column 614

Friend for the close consideration that we know he will give to the points that I have raised. I hope that he will be able to say something about the progress of the review and how we are to regard the future, which is very important for us all.

It will not be an easy decision. It is very important that we have the fullest possible consultation and openness of government on the issue. If it is a straight battle, which it may or may not be, between Harrogate and RAF Wyton, I can say only that we will bend over backwards to show that we can provide the work force and, I am sure, a site and buildings which can be adapted. Our services are wholly available to the Minister in his quest for the right location. There can be no doubt about that.

I hope that the Minister will take my words on board and will be able to give us some advice today that will point the way to the decisions--painful though those decisions will have to be for many people in different parts of the country. I hope that we shall hear something about that now.

9.59 am

The Minister of State for the Armed Forces (Mr. Archie Hamilton) : I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate (Mr. Banks) on being successful in the ballot for subjects for debate today, and I am grateful for this opportunity to clarify for the House the nature and purpose of the studies that have been under way for some time into the future organisation of RAF Logistics. Because the Ministry of Defence and RAF staff at Harrogate play such an important part in the management of RAF Logistics, the studies clearly have to encompass the future of the site.

The Ministry of Defence at Harrogate employs some 300 service and 1,200 civilian staff and provides the single largest collocated element of the support management organisation. The task of this organisation is to provide the logistic support necessary to underwrite the RAF's operational capability and, as a result of rationalised arrangements, the operational capability of the Army Air Corps and Fleet Air Arm. Support is also provided to some overseas Governments who have purchased British defence equipment. The organisation provides aircraft fleet and inventory management, draws up maintenance and supply policy and manages the provision, procurement and management of spares, modifications, and the repair of equipments and components. It does not itself carry the functions of aircraft and component repair and overhaul, or spares manufacture. Its suppliers are the Maintenance Defence Support Agency--a part of RAF support command--the Naval Aircraft Repair Organisation and, predominantly, private industry. There are, however, significant elements of the organisation not currently based in Harrogate. As my hon. Friend said, the reorganisation will affect people located in several different parts of the country-- people based in London, at the RAF headquarters strike command High Wycombe and RAF support command at Brampton, and people who work with specialist staffs at RAF Swanton Morley in Norfolk, RAF Stanbridge in Bedfordshire, and at Glasgow and Liverpool. The task of the studies under way is to design and identify the most efficient and effective structure and location for the long-term future of the support

Column 615

management organisation, bringing it into balance with the reductions in the front line which have already been announced. I remind the House that my right hon. Friend the Member for Bridgwater (Mr. King), then Secretary of State for Defence, announced on 25 July 1990 the outline structure of British forces for the future. Further details were set out in the "Statement on the Defence Estimates" published on 9 July 1991. For the RAF, the closures of the stations at Wildenrath and Gutersloh in Germany have been announced and, indeed, most of their squadrons have been disbanded or relocated already. Cessation of flying at RAF Wattisham has been announced and its Phantom squadrons will be disbanded later this year. Flying will also cease at RAF Honnington and RAF regiment units are to be relocated from West Raynham, Catterick and Hullavington as the number of RAF regiment squadrons reduces.

On the support side, the maintenance unit at Abingdon is to close later this year, the flying training school at Church Fenton is changing to a relief landing ground and flying training is to cease at RAF Brawdy. Further closures and rationalisations in ground training, maintenance, supply and movements will be announced and made in due course and there is a continuing programme of closure for RAF stations used by the United States Air Force in this country. In those circumstances, it is necessary for us to review and streamline the logistics management organisation and associated MOD headquarters functions to meet the needs of the new front line and supporting units : it would be quite wrong of us not to do so. Indeed, if we did not, we could not undertake to provide the well-equipped and well-trained front line for 1990s and beyond which the Government have promised. The Government have therefore made it clear that they seek substantial savings in the support area, at least proportionate to the reductions in the front line. As part of that, we approved last year the recommendations of a study--known as the PROSPECT study--on the future size and structure of the Ministry of Defence and its relationships with the commands. The recommendations that are being implemented include headquarters manpower savings at all levels of at least 20 per cent. and significant relocation of posts out of London. The object of the changes is to reduce substantially the MOD's overheads and streamline its working practices, consistent with the reductions in our front-line strengths, the opportunities opened by the Department's new management strategy and the application of new information technology. At a time of such change in our armed forces following the momentous international developments of recent years, we owe it to them and to the public at large to produce a leaner and more responsive MOD.

Central to the study's recommendations was the principle that only small, core headquarters should be retained in London, with the remaining functions being redeployed. For the RAF, the report recommended in particular that the staffs of the Air Member for Supply and Organisation-- within whose department are the majority of the staffs currently based at Harrogate--should move out of London and, together with associated elements of RAF support command, chiefly the Maintenance Defence

Column 616

Support Agency, form a logistics command located at the current RAF support command headquarters at Brampton, near Huntingdon. On formation of the new command, the separate appointments of AMSO and air officer commanding in chief support command would be abolished. As a consequence of these changes, it is clear that there will be significant relocation of staff to the Brampton area. The object of the studies now under way has been to establish the best long-term locations for the remainder of the staffs in other parts of the new logistics command, which are not already located in the Brampton area. As I have already said, they are predominantly in London, at Harrogate, High Wycombe, RAF Stanbridge and RAF Swanton Morley. It is clear that, to meet the challenging targets for efficiency which we have set, we shall need to exploit to the maximum the opportunities for the collocation and integration of service and civilian staffs. This will enable us to reduce the management overhead and, with the use of modern management techniques and information technology, improve the quality of decision taking. The RAF is already embarked upon a major update of its logistics information systems--many of which date from the late 1960s and early 1970s--known as the logistics information technology strategy, or--to use one of the acronyms which the MOD loves--LITS. Also, following a fundamental review of the management of supply and engineering in the late 1980s, RAF support management now operates on the basis of multi-discipline groups, which combine engineering, supply, procurement and financial disciplines into project teams. These are already showing their worth, but full integration, which we must achieve to exploit fully the opportunities of new technology and new working practices, has been hampered by the current dispersed nature of the organisation. The PROSPECT study, which these reforms preceded, provides an opportunity, unlikely to recur, of overcoming this drawback and achieving substantial long-term benefits.

We recognise, however, that such collocation and integration will be disruptive and potentially costly in the short term. Consequently, all available options for the long-term location of all elements of the new logistics command are the subject of intensive and exhaustive study. Although it is clear that there are no options which do not involve relocation, we need to take into account the costs of reproviding office accommodation, domestic accommodation for service personnel who will remain an essential part of the command, relocation of civilian staff, the provision of information technology, the availability of suitably qualified staff, and their training, together with local housing and transport needs. We also need to investigate the opportunities for making the best use of the current defence estate and minimise expensive reprovision of new buildings. With an extensive drawdown in the defence estate under way, there has clearly been a wide range of potential solutions.

From an early stage, however, it has been evident to all concerned that the solutions fall into one of two broad categories : a northern solution, which my hon. Friend suggested, based on the current site at Harrogate, and an East Anglian solution, centred on the current headquarters site at Brampton. Each option will have its advocates and my hon. Friend has been most eloquent in putting forward the virtues of an outcome based at Harrogate.

Column 617

The Harrogate solution would have the advantage of a large resident work force. However, it would require relocation northward of significant numbers of RAF and civilian specialist staff, and reprovision and expansion of the current buildings which, as my hon. Friend accepts, are almost 50 years old and coming to the end of their economic life. As part of this, we are also studying the possible use of spare capacity at RAF training stations in the area. A solution in the Brampton area would require more relocation, but over shorter distances for many of the specialists involved. Brampton is very close to the RAF station at Wyton, which has significant potential for reuse and is generally well maintained. I take my hon. Friend's point that it is in the constituency of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. Ambitious as I am, that has not been one of the factors that has made us consider Wyton as a serious candidate. I assure the House that every option is subject to the most stringent and rigorous operational and economic analysis.

We would, however, ignore qualitative factors at our peril, and I am fully aware of the Department's obligations to its work force. I should like to pay in particular a tribute to the loyalty, dedication and skill of the civilian staff who have always played a major role in the provision of RAF Logistics. They are well aware that major studies are under way into the future of RAF Logistics which will affect both their personal and professional lives.

I am determined that, while we must achieve the efficient provision of the very best logistic support for the RAF for the 1990s and beyond, in doing so we shall also seek to provide a promising and rewarding professional life for those who seek a career in the area. But there will undoubtedly be short-term disruption for some. While we can agree on the appropriateness and need for smaller armed forces, the streamlining of their support, and a smaller proportion of our national wealth being spent on defence, those aims will not be achieved without disruptions and possibly redundancy for some and temporary damage to local economies where establishments are closed. Whatever the outcome of the recommendations, everything possible will be done to minimise the adverse effects on our employees. Staff in grades with a mobility obligation would, where appropriate, be transferred at public expense and transfers to other Government Departments or MOD establishments would be investigated fully, especially for staff in grades with no mobility obligation. The MOD would establish close contact with employers in areas affected, including other Government Departments which may have relocation plans of their own which offer opportunities for co- ordination. Any staff leaving prematurely under voluntary or compulsory redundancy terms would have available the services of the MOD counselling service and would be compensated under the terms of the appropriate pension scheme.

I am conscious that continued uncertainty for those potentially involved a source of anxiety--a point made strongly by my hon. Friend--and I hope soon to make public our proposals as a basis for consultation. We shall not make a final decision on the way ahead without taking into account all the relevant factors and without a proper period of consultation. In particular, I assure the House that the recommendations will be subject to the full consultative procedures agreed between the Department and the trades unions.

Column 618

Textile and Clothing Industries

10.13 am

Mr. Max Madden (Bradford, West) : I am extremely pleased to be able to introduce this short debate on the impact of the general agreement on tariffs and trade on the British textile and clothing industries. Before I do so, I take this first opportunity to congratulate you, Mr. Deputy Speaker, on your appointment. As a fellow Yorkshire Member, I hope that you have a long, successful and happy tenure in your office, which is very well deserved.

I also declare an interest as a sponsored Member of the Transport and General Workers Union. I take an especial pleasure in representing the TGWU textiles group which represents many thousands of men and women throughout the United Kingdom who depend for their livelihoods on the British textile and clothing industries. When I applied for the debate, I did not imagine that it would be as timely as it has proved to be. Only yesterday, in the aftermath of the apparent agreement on agriculture by European Community Agriculture Ministers, a number of hon. Members of all parties pressed for a Government statement on the future of the GATT round. This debate allows the Minister to give the House, the industry and the general public some idea about the current position of the GATT round and about the prospects for a successful conclusion to the GATT negotiations.

The negotiations are now 18 months behind schedule. The main obstacle and difficulty in the negotiations has been agreement on agriculture. Many in the textile and clothing industries are extremely concerned about the apparent priority given to agriculture compared with that given to the textile and clothing industries. In sheer economic terms, the textile and clothing industries are far more important. The output of the British textile and clothing industries is £15 billion compared with £13.4 billion for agriculture. In exports, the figures are £4.5 billion compared with £2.6 billion and in employment, the figures are 420,000 compared with 262,000.

In recent years, agriculture seems to have enjoyed by far the greater attention of all concerned. The December 1990 GATT conference in Brussels, which was designed to agree a conclusion, broke up without agreement, mainly because of differences on agriculture. After further negotiations in December 1991, the GATT

director-general, Arthur Dunkel, presented a paper setting out suggested conclusions for the round and asking for rapid agreement. The EC refused to accept the paper because the section on agriculture was unacceptable to it and since then, negotiations on agriculture between the EC and the United States have continued without agreement. Other sections of the Dunkel paper, including those relevant to textiles, have been put on ice until the disagreements on agriculture are resolved. Once that happens, there are other loose ends to be tied up, notably services and tariff reduction negotations.

Throughout the period, the main concern seems to have been agriculture, at the expense of textiles and clothing and of other sectors of industry and services. The apparent importance given to agriculture highlights the worries that continue to exist in the British textile and clothing industries about how those industries are perceived by British Ministers and civil servants, by European Commissioners and EC bureaucrats and by competing textile and clothing industries around the world. There are

Column 619

lingering suspicions among those who work in the British industries that they do not count and that they are not really rated. They fear that they are seen by many Ministers and British civil servants as boring whingers. Whenever the subject of British textiles and clothing comes up, Ministers and officials tend to stare at the ceiling or at their imported silk socks. Sometimes, the industries are depicted as always moaning and their trade and profits are suspected of being a good deal better than they are prepared to let on ; at others, they are depicted as old-fashioned and out-of-date industries desperately seeking total protection from the winds of free trade and free competition.

British Ministers must do their best permanently to sweep away those suspicions and the best way of doing that is by taking positive action to instil confidence in the minds of all those who work in the industries that the British Government are pledged to do all that they can to defend the industries' interests and to promote them overseas. Ministerial rhetoric has failed miserably to do that over the years.

It is vital that the Government show their support for the British textile and clothing industries, and action is necessary on a number of fronts. First, and most important, the British textile and clothing industries must be placed at the heart of the revival of British manufacturing. It is most important that the Government's trade, economic and fiscal policies all give positive support to British manufacturing in general and to the textile and clothing industries in particular.

The Minister will be aware of the grave misgivings felt not only in the textile and clothing industries but throughout British industry about the present and future role of his Department. Many of us believe that, unfortunately, as Secretaries of State for Trade and Industry, Mr. Nicholas Ridley and the present Secretary of State for Social Security presided over the demise of their own Department. Until recently, that great Department gave the impression that it had shut up shop, that it took no interest in the future of British manufacturing industry and that it was entirely unwilling to intervene on behalf of British manufacturing or to promote and defend its interests.

All that has changed because of the great promise that the present Secretary of State carries with him. During his attempts to become leader of the Conservative party and subsequently, he has been seen as a disciple- -indeed, an evangelist--of British manufacturing. I know that the House is deserted on this occasion, but our debates are read with considerable interest. I hope, therefore, that the Minister will take this opportunity to share with us the Department's thinking--and, in particular, the thinking of the Secretary of State--about the reorganisation of the Department and to tell us what attitude the Department will adopt to British manufacturing in future. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be able to tell us, for example, that the conclusion is rapidly being reached that it is high time that the Department established a division with direct responsibility for the British textile and clothing industries on a day-to- day basis. That would enable Ministers and officials to build a continuing dialogue with all sections of the industries and to have access to knowledge and expertise in the industries, thus ensuring that their best

Column 620

interests are represented in all places and on all occasions and that a genuine effort is made to assist and to defend them. Other measures need to be taken and I shall come to GATT in a moment. I take this opportunity to urge the Minister to consider what action his Department can take to promote exports. As I have already said, the British textile and clothing industries have a remarkable export record, but that record could be improved if the Department were prepared to enter real discussions to find ways of promoting and increasing British exports.

I have always wondered why our discussions on the textile and clothing industries are restricted to Adjournment debates and the odd question at Question Time. Hon. Members representing constituencies throughout the United Kingdom have no regular opportunity to question Ministers, to draw to their attention matters of concern and to urge that the Government act to promote this major British industry. I strongly urge that we should have at least an annual debate on the industries to give all hon. Members a proper opportunity to speak up on the industries' behalf, in exactly the same way as other hon. Members have the opportunity to speak on agriculture. There is a regular monthly Question Time on agriculture, and at least one debate a year, and I cannot understand why we still do not have such opportunities to speak about textiles and clothing.

We must look to the Department of Trade and Industry to ensure that its arrangements for monitoring all agreements concerning textiles and clothing, including GATT, are effective and that surveillance is carried out thoroughly and as a matter of urgency.

What of matters affecting the GATT negotiations and discussions? I hope that, following yesterday's agreement, the Minister will be able to give us some clear information about the expected schedule for those negotiations. The Minister will know that there was considerable pleasure when it was agreed that the multi-fibre arrangement would not be phased out in less than 10 years. We must insist on that part of the agreement being maintained and the minimum phase-out period must be firmly linked to the strengthening of GATT rules and disciplines.

It would also help if the Minister could say that, even if good progress is now made in the negotiations, the GATT agreement is unlikely to be concluded and implemented until--most

optimistically--the middle of next year and probably until the end of next year. The extension of the MFA--which we were very pleased to obtain-- expires in December and it is most important that there should be a further extension, for at least another 12 months. The extension should apply for whatever period is necessary to coincide with the implementation of the full GATT negotiations and agreement. We are also very anxious about several other issues. There must be a vigorous attack in the GATT market access negotiating group on high tariffs. We are concerned about high tariffs in developing countries and particularly in the United States where the tariff on wool cloth is still 36 per cent. There should be better export opportunities for the United Kingdom industry.

There must be strict enforcement of the current MFA arrangements. New quotas are needed in some cases to deal with damaging import surges and a major assault on fraudulent evasion of quotas, especially by China, should be carried out. We also urge the Minister and the Government to deal with current subsidy problems,

Column 621

notably in relation to the provision of subsidised raw materials to some of the United Kingdom's competitors. The level playing field that we are seeking remains as elusive as ever. We urge the Minister and the Government to do everything possible to ensure that competition is free and fair.

I said earlier that many people in the textile and clothing industries are thought to be boring whingers. If we are honest, it must be accepted that we have a great deal to be concerned about. There has been a massive reduction in employment in our industries. Half a million people have lost their jobs over the past 20 years. In all, 560,000 jobs have disappeared from every region in the United Kingdom. The most recent figures show that 7,000 jobs are being lost every quarter. We must heavily underline the importance of the textile and clothing industries to the regions.

You, Mr. Deputy Speaker, like me, will be aware of the importance of the textile and clothing industries to Yorkshire and Humberside. However, it is worth stressing that importance. At the moment, 63,000 men and women depend on the industries in Yorkshire and Humberside. That represents 15 per cent. of those employed in the industries throughout the United Kingdom and that is equal to 16 per cent. of manufacturing employment in our region. A similar picture occurs in other regions.

I would like the Minister to tell us something about the current position of the RETEX scheme. As the House will be aware, that scheme is designed to assist textile and clothing firms that want to diversify because of the decline in the industry. I should like to know what the budget for RETEX is likely to be. The Commission was to announce that budget. I contacted the Department yesterday and said that I was today intending to ask for information about the scheme. I hope that the Minister can provide it.

In addition to the amount of money available, there is concern about the availability of RETEX funds. At the moment, it seems that funds will be available only to assisted areas. That would exclude certain areas, even within West Yorkshire, where the textile industry is an important employer and an important part of the local economy. I urge the Minister to consider the matter and to ensure that we consider distribution of RETEX funds to regions rather than areas, so that regions where textiles and clothing are important can benefit from the scheme.

I also informed the Minister that I intended to refer today to pentachlorophenal--PCP--which is a fungicide used on grey, unfinished cloth in Asia and the far east. It is used on cotton when growing and also to prevent mildew during transit. When treated cloth is subsequently bleached, dyed or printed in the United Kingdom, any PCP is removed during the finishing process and discharged into the finisher's waste water.

The finishing industry faces difficulties because the permitted levels of PCP in waste water are restricted to very low levels as a result of EC legislation. Yorkshire Water is examining PCP levels at the moment and some water companies have already advised customers that from 1 July discharges containing PCP will not be accepted. I understand that there is no known practical way of removing PCP from waste water. The textile finishing industry is currently undertaking a £290,000 research project into the problem. However, because of a delay in

Column 622

obtaining funding from the Department of Trade and Industry, the project is not due to report until June of next year.

The finisher also does not own the grey cloth that he processes. It is owned by his customer. The pressures brought to bear by textile finishers on their customers have cut PCP pollution levels by an estimated 40 to 50 per cent. However, there are still insufficient quantities of grey cloth available that are not treated with PCP. Customers in this country have up to two years' supply of grey cloth for finishing which has been treated with PCP. Textile companies may be forced to scrap those supplies which are worth millions of pounds, unless there is provision to extend the pollution deadline. I hope that the Minister will give us the Department's view about that problem, because it is clear that a sympathetic approach must be adopted. There is a degree of urgency because of the deadline.

I urge the Minister to take this opportunity to clarify the current position on the GATT negotiations and give us clear assurances that the textile and clothing industries will not be regarded as expendable or as industries whose interests can be traded off to reach an agreement under GATT. All the assurances that have been given about the Government's position on the negotiations should be maintained. I hope that the Minister will assure us that the best interests of the British textile and clothing industry will not be neglected or put on one side by the Government.

10.39 am

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Technology (Mr. Edward Leigh) : I congratulate the hon. Member for Bradford, West (Mr. Madden) on his success in securing a debate on a subject which he follows closely and about which he has considerable knowledge. Whenever matters affecting the clothing and textiles industries are considered in the House, he is assiduous in his attendance and in making his full contribution. He has just done so once again and I hope that I will be able, in replying, to cover the main points which he made.

Contrary to what he said about himself, I would never regard the hon. Member for Bradford, West as a boring whinger ; far from it. He speaks with great knowledge on textile matters. He raised some technical points. The first was RETEX, which comes under the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Minister for Industry, who is responsible for regional policy. I shall draw the hon. Gentleman's remarks to my right hon. Friend's attention. We have not come to a definitive conclusion about RETEX. As the hon. Gentleman will know, many initiatives have been promoted by the European Commission. I believe that RETEX is the eighteenth. When I was responsible for regional policy, we were prepared to consider proposals made by Commissioner Millan in a constructive light. I know that my right hon. Friend the Minister will be interested in the hon. Gentleman's remarks.

The hon. Member for Bradford, West also raised the problem of pentachlorophenol. That is a matter principally for my colleagues at the Department of the Environment. I understand the anxiety of the hon. Gentleman as a local Member of Parliament about environmental matters and I have noted the force with which he expressed himself today. I shall ensure that my

Column 623

hon. Friend who is responsible for such matters at the Department of the Environment contacts the hon. Gentleman.

Like the hon. Gentleman, I pay tribute to the importance of the textile industry. As he well knows, the textiles and clothing industry is still the United Kingdom's largest employer, with about 390,000 people working in it. The Government attach considerable importance to its health and well-being. It remains a substantial wealth creator, despite the retrenchment in size in past decades. It still accounts for roughly 2 per cent. of total employment in the United Kingdom and almost 9 per cent. of manufacturing employment. It is the fifth largest manufacturing sector in the United Kingdom and one of our main exporters.

I took careful note of what the hon. Gentleman said about the House devoting more time to the textiles industry. I shall certainly be happy to pass his observations on to my right hon. Friend the Leader of the House. The Department of Trade and Industry attaches enormous importance to the textiles industry. A great deal of time is spent by my officials and those who advise me in ensuring that the Department is a worthy ambassador for one of our greatest and most important industries.

So, by any reckoning, the textiles and clothing industry is of enormous importance to the United Kingdom economy. It has achieved much and has shown very considerable resilience largely because of its skilled and adaptable work force and strengthened management. It has proved itself to be extremely competitive, especially at the quality end of the market. It should also be noted that the industry has made increasing use of new techniques and technologies which have resulted in significant productivity gains. Advances have also been made in design and there is an increasing trend towards specialisation, with companies identifying what they do best and adapting and developing for all they are worth.

All the factors that I have mentioned are important if we are to have a thriving and competitive industry able to respond rapidly to the changing demands of the market place. Output declined in 1989, 1990 and again in 1991 as consumer demand weakened. But this had been preceded by a buoyant period in the sector in the mid-1980s when exports grew strongly and profit growth was above the manufacturing sector average.

The industry's fortunes are closely linked with the consumer market, and measures to slow down demand in the economy have inevitably been reflected in its short-term performance. But the United Kingdom textiles sector has not been unique in experiencing stagnant output growth at the beginning of the 1990s. The picture is similar for most other EC producers.

In 1991 both exports and imports were close to the previous year's levels. Exports were up by 2 per cent. in value terms to £4.7 billion. Indeed, clothing exports have surprised industry observers by their continued strength--in 1991 they were up 13 per cent. over 1990. By contrast, exports of textiles have been a little sluggish--down by 4 per cent. in 1991. Imports of clothing and textiles fell 1 per cent. in 1991.

With improving economic prospects, the industry can now look forward to emerging from a difficult period and building on the strengths developed during the 1980s.

Next Section

  Home Page