House of Commons Hansard Debates for 21 Apr 1993

Mr. Hamilton : I am aware of my hon. Friend's concerns. Such policies inevitably create difficulties from time to time. Some parts of the country have great disadvantages on account of historical change and transition from old-fashioned industries to new ones. My hon. Friend the Minister for Energy has discussed the case with me and I take his concerns seriously. We want to see economic prosperity in all parts of the country, and regional selective assistance plays a part in achieving that objective.

Miners (Unemployment Insurance)

11. Mr. Enright : To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he will hold discussions with insurance companies on the problems facing miners who wish to insure against unemployment ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Eggar : The issue of policies and their terms are for the commercial judgment of insurance companies. It would not be appropriate to intervene in their commercial decisions. However, as my hon. Friend the Member for Littleborough and Saddleworth (Mr. Dickens) said, miners who are made redundant are eligible for generous redundancy payments of up to £37,000 per man.

Mr. Enright : Will the Minister persuade his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to take time off from dipping his hand in the till of miners' pensions with

Column 315

the same ease with which he used to whirl the Mace, and consider the problem of miners in pits such as Stillingfleet, who have a long future ahead of them but are unable to obtain insurance due to the document uttered by the Minister, "Prospects for Coal"? Insurance companies no longer think that any pit has a future. We are not talking about redundant miners, but miners who are in work--what is the Minister going to do about it?

Mr. Eggar : I hope that the hon. Gentleman will reflect on the use of language. I do not understand how he believes that the cause that he seeks to promote is furthered by using language as he has just done.

Mr. Quentin Davies : How many jobs are being created for miners who have been made redundant by British Coal Enterprise and other Government initiatives in coal mines or former coal mining areas?

Mr. Eggar : British Coal Enterprise is playing an active role in finding additional jobs and relocating individuals. Between 1987 and 1992, no fewer than 84 per cent. of all those who registered with British Coal Enterprise were found long-term employment within a year to 18 months. That is a very impressive record.

Mr. Stevenson : Is the Minister aware that any insurance that may be available against job losses is no substitute for a job? In my constituency, it is estimated that the proposed cruel closure of Trentham colliery will lead to 4,400 people losing their jobs with a loss to the local economy of £84 million. Is the Minister prepared to assure us that the resources available to create employment will reflect that tragic and massive loss in that area?

Mr. Eggar : The Trentham colliery is part of the continuing consultation process on the closures. Should it be decided that Trentham be closed, of course the private sector will be able to lease or, in due course, purchase Trentham. I am sure that that is something which the hon. Gentleman will welcome.

Mr. Oppenheim : Is my hon. Friend aware that thousands of former miners in my constituency were made redundant and given a pittance for redundancy pay under previous Labour Governments, so the Opposition have no right to preach to us about hands in tills when it comes to miners? Do not millions of workers in other industries rely for their jobs on competitively priced energy, and to give coal a monopoly on energy, as Labour would like, would put thousands of jobs at risk elsewhere in the economy?

Mr. Eggar : The hypocrisy of the Opposition knows no bounds.

Mr. Enright : On a point of order, Madam Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's answer, I propose to ask for an Adjournment debate.

Aerospace Industry

12. Mr. Hanson : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to meet the Society of British Aerospace Companies to discuss future prospects for the industry ; and if he will make a statement.

Mr. Sainsbury : My right hon. Friend has no current plans to meet the Society of British Aerospace Companies, but my Department keeps in close touch with the society

Column 316

and its member companies. Two weeks ago I led a SBAC mission which discussed United Kingdom export opportunities with the Boeing company in Seattle.

Mr. Hanson : Is the Minister aware that even as we speak there is a lobby of the House by aerospace workers who are seeking to stop the haemorrhage of jobs--50,000 in the past few years, including many in my own constituency in north Wales? Will the Minister take action on the aerospace industry and today publish the report by his own aviation committee which is critical of the Government's policy? Will he act upon its recommendations and give the House an assurance that he will undertake to accept the recommendations of the Trade and Industry Select Committee which is meeting today?

Mr. Sainsbury : The hon. Gentleman is, I hope, aware that the aerospace industry world wide is suffering both from the welcome reduction in defence orders, and the recession in the airline industry which has obviously reduced the number of orders that the industry has to satisfy. The industry receives a great deal of Government support and will continue to do so.

Mr. Nicholas Winterton : Does my right hon. Friend accept that the British aerospace industry, particularly British Aerospace itself, is one of Britain's largest exporters and has an outstanding record of achievement? Will he ensure that British Aerospace, particularly the regional jet division which is located on the periphery of my constituency, always receives sympathetic consideration from the Department in respect of launch aid for new projects and the research and development which is so essential to the success of the industry?

Mr. Sainsbury : I am very happy to take this opportunity to pay tribute to the export success of British Aerospace and the British aerospace industry in general. As my hon. Friend will know, since 1979 that industry has received considerable support from the Government--no less than £1.5 billion. As I said in my earlier reply, it will continue to receive support.

Mr. Barry Jones : May I tell the right hon. Gentleman of the devastating loss of 269 British Aerospace jobs in my constituency at the Broughton works, and of the amazement of the work force who have learnt that nearly 100 of those jobs are to be directly exported to the constituency of President Clinton at Little Rock? Will he intervene? Will he receive the petition that I have today received from a lobby of my constituents, who are angry and disappointed and who look to the Government to give them help?

Mr. Sainsbury : I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will be aware that decisions on its corporate jet business are clearly commercial matters for the company. It must make the decisions as it sees fit in the best interests of the business. The hon. Gentleman will be assured to know that the company has said that it has no intention of closing down the Chester or Broughton production facilities.

Mr. Ian Bruce : Has my right hon. Friend received any representations from the Society of British Aerospace Companies about the European Community Konver programme ? Has he yet had a chance to look at the strange classification of the areas that should be helped by the European Community ? That classification seems to exclude counties such as Dorset and the travel-to-work

Column 317

area of Weymouth and Portland, which has a 43 per cent. defence dependency and which clearly should be helped by any money that comes from this programme.

Mr. Sainsbury : I have not received any representations on that point from the SBAC, but if I do, I will be happy to look at them. I share some of my hon. Friend's concerns about the proposals emerging under the Konver programme--especially for the reasons that he has advanced : it does not seem to direct enough support to the areas that would most deserve it.

Nuclear Review

13. Mr. Tipping : To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will announce the timetable for the 1993 nuclear review.

Mr. Eggar : The Government set out in the White Paper, "Prospects for Coal", their intention to bring forward the review of the future prospects for nuclear power originally scheduled for 1994. A further announcement about the review will be made in the summer.

Mr. Tipping : Does the Minister understand the real anger in Nottinghamshire and throughout the country arising from the fact that, while nuclear electricity receives a subsidy of £1.3 billion, half the coal industry has been closed down ? Will he bring forward the review of nuclear electricity as quickly as possible so that mothballed collieries such as Bilsthorpe, Calverton and Rufford will at last have a chance to compete on equal terms ?

Mr. Eggar : I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is aware that large numbers of trade unionists very much welcome the decision on nuclear power. The trade unionists for safe nuclear energy came to thank me for the decisions announced in the White Paper, and agreed with the hon. Gentleman that the review should be brought forward so as to end the apparent fear of some uncertainty about the future of the nuclear industry. At the time of the review, we will look at a large number of issues that relate to the future of the nuclear industry.

Mrs. Lait : Is my hon. Friend aware that nuclear power is clean, safe and good value? Is he further aware that the project team at Sizewell B is bringing in that project on time and at cost, which will make it a world-beating project team for further nuclear power stations? Will he assure the House that the benefits and achievements of our nuclear industry will be borne in mind when he undertakes the review?

Mr. Eggar : Certainly we will. My latest information is that Sizewell B is likely to be brought in under project cost and ahead of time.

Dr. Kim Howells : Will two critical decisions affecting the future of the nuclear industry be delayed until after the publication of the nuclear review? I refer to the deep repository for spent nuclear fuel and to the start-up of the thermal oxide reprocessing plant project. The Minister will know that it has already cost the taxpayers of this country £2.8 billion and it is costing British Nuclear Fuels plc a great deal of money every week because is is not starting up.

Mr. Eggar : I am aware of the widespread concern on all sides of the House about the delays to the THORP project.

Column 318

BNFL estimates that the delay in the start- up of the project is costing about £2 million per week. Of course, the matter is being considered urgently by my right hon. Friends.

Exports

14. Mr. Pawsey : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what are the top 10 export industries ; and what level of exports they are each responsible for in percentage terms.

Mr. Needham : Aerospace, industrial chemicals, office equipment and computers and motor vehicles industries each contributed 6 per cent. Oil and gas, the electronic consumer goods and components industry, telecommunication equipment and control systems and machinery for general industrial use contributed 4 per cent. Motor vehicle parts and pharmaceuticals industries contributed3 per cent.

Mr. Pawsey : May I thank my hon. Friend for that complete reply which underlines the importance of manufacturing industry to the economy and, harking back to the question by the hon. Member for Halifax (Mrs. Mahon), also to jobs? Will my hon. Friend therefore join me in congratulating companies like GEC Alstom Ltd and Cegelec Ltd in my constituency, which have outstanding records in exports? Does he agree that much more might be done to help exporters, for example, by further reducing rates of export credit guarantees?

Mr. Needham : I agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of manufacturing industry to exports. I am sure my hon. Friend would like to know that since 1981 the volume of United Kingdom manufactured exports has increased by four fifths, faster than France, Germany, Italy, the United States and Japan. The range of industries that I read out shows the depth and breadth of industry involved and its success. My hon. Friend is right to point to GEC Alstom Ltd in his constituency. GEC, one of the most successful companies in the country, is already saying that in the 1990s it will double its exports to the Pacific rim. I am sure that it will succeed in that.

Ms Short : Does the Minister agree that, after the longest recession since the 1930s, the fact that Britain has a balance of payments deficit means that we have had a serious failure over the last 14 years in our strategy for manufacturing industry? Does he agree that that is very worrying for the future? Can he tell us whether the Government have any policies or strategy to increase investment in manufacturing, or will they just write off the future?

Mr. Needham : The hon. Lady and her hon. Friends write off the future every time they stand on their feet, by knocking British manufacturing and its successes. British industry is now in a position to capture an increasing number of markets in the world ; the Department of Trade and Industry is standing alongside it in achieving that objective. As I remarked just now, if the hon. Lady was listening, the capital goods industry has already said that in the next seven years it will double its exports from £10 billion to £20 billion. No doubt the hon. Lady would like to come out selling.

Column 319

Mrs. Peacock : My hon. Friend will be aware of the importance of textiles in our export market. Can he tell the House whether he has received any representations on the report that south Korea is about to add fairly high tariffs to our wool textile goods exported to that country?

Mr. Needham : I have not as yet. As I intend to go to Korea tomorrow, I shall raise the matter with the Korean Government.

Mr. Bell : In reference to the question put by the hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth (Mr. Pawsey) about export credit guarantees, may we welcome the extension of the guarantees to Russia following the G7 talks in Japan? Will the Minister confirm that the major issue facing exporters is the future of the 20 per cent. political risk cover guaranteed by the Department of Trade and Industry? It is supposed to expire at the end of 1994. When may we expect a statement from the Minister that it will be extended?

Mr. Needham : We are considering the matter through ECGD with NCM and Trade Indemnity. I believe that the hon. Member is referring to the reinsurance aspects of political risk. Companies have been successful in managing to place some 90 per cent. of that in the private market this year, but I am keeping the matter under close review.

Post Office

15. Mr. Harry Greenway : To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the future of the Post Office.

Column 320

Mr. Heseltine : I refer my hon. Friend to the answer that I gave earlier to my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, South (Mr. Marshall).

Mr. Greenway : Is my right hon. Friend aware of the wonderful support that I have had from my constituents in battles to save five post offices? Public meetings which I organised were attended by hundreds of people. Each of the post offices was saved and enhanced as part of Post Office Counters. Will my right hon. Friend assure me that, in the event of privatisation, the services of those post offices will be further enhanced? Will he also look at the issue of postal collections across London on Sundays, which are currently rare? More collections are needed. If the Post Office is privatised will there be more postal collections on Sundays?

Mr. Heseltine : I have no doubt whatever of my hon. Friend's unremitting efforts on behalf of the post offices in his constituency. I am delighted to hear of the success which I am sure he richly deserves. I should properly refer matters such as post office services on Sundays in London to the Post Office board and I shall rapidly do so.

Mr. Bryan Davies : Is not another attractive feature of Post Office privatisation for the Government the fact that yet another board will be created which superannuated Ministers can join and draw healthy emoluments for their services?

Mr. Heseltine : The hon. Gentleman will remember that that precedent was established by Labour when it created nationalised industries and transferred Ministers to run them.

Next Section (Debates)

Home Page