House of Commons Hansard Debates for 24 Nov 1993

Column 440

Mr. Heseltine : The share of manufacturing gross domestic product has fallen by around six percentage points since 1979. All the main industrialised countries are seeing a decline in the share of GDP accounted for by manufacturing.

Mr. Hain : At this rate, Britain is in danger of becoming a manufacturing-free zone with more people on the dole doing nothing than in factories producing British goods. Instead of blaming everybody else, why will the President of the Board of Trade not start to invest in skills, infrastructure and industry and provide industry with the long-term, low- cost finance which it needs. That is the way to recovery. Why does the right hon. Gentleman not have an industrial strategy to build that recovery?

Mr. Heseltine : The hon. Member will be pleased to know that manufacturing output rose by 1.6 per cent. during the past 12 months. Manufacturing productivity rose by 5 per cent. during the same period, while manufacturing exports to non-EC countries were 16 per cent. higher. I am sure that the hon. Member and his right hon. and hon. Friends will welcome that good news.

Mr. Anthony Coombs : Will my right hon. Friend remind the Opposition that recent figures issued by the university of Cambridge show that manufacturing output in this country has risen by 30 per cent. since 1979, while under the previous Labour Government it fell? Is not it perverse in the extreme to wish small firms well and at the same time to support the social chapter, to support compulsory recognition of trade unions, and to support increased taxation? Is not that exactly what the Opposition have tried to do?

Mr. Heseltine : My hon. Friend is anticipating the speech that I hope to make to the House later this afternoon.

Mr. Barry Jones : May I tell the right hon. Gentleman about a manufacturing success in my constituency--the construction of the executive jet which can fly the Atlantic and which can carry 12 people? Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House why he permitted the sale of that magnificent aeroplane by British Aerospace to the American firm, Raytheon? Will he guarantee that production of the aeroplane will remain in Britain after three years?

The right hon. Gentleman should know that my constituents who build the plane are concerned about the future of their jobs in the long term. The right hon. Gentleman boasts about manufacturing. Why did he allow that great machine to be sold to an American company ?

Mr. Heseltine : Is the hon. Member suggesting that we should have controls in every constituency and in every industry over whether British companies should be sold to American companies? The hon. Gentleman should realise that the effect of that would be to choke off the inward investment from which this country has had such success.

Mr. Burns : Does my right hon. Friend accept that one way to help enhance manufacturing capability in areas that have suffered from defence- related redundancies is through the support of the Konver fund which his Department backs? Given that results on bids for Konver are being made available next week, may I, as a last-minute

Column 441

request, put in a plug for the bid by Essex and Chelmsford to help those areas that have been badly affected by defence -related redundancies?

Mr. Heseltine : My hon. Friend is right to take every possible opportunity to put in bids that will help his constituency. I only hope that all of my hon. Friends will not take immediate advantage of that precedent.

Mr. Fatchett : In his responses, the President of the Board of Trade seems to have failed to understand the problems that affect British industry or to accept the Government's record during the past 14 years. Will the right hon. Gentleman acknowledge that 2.6 million jobs have been lost in British manufacturing industry? Will the right hon. Gentleman also acknowledge that this country comes near the bottom--if not at the bottom-- of league tables on research, development, and training by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development?

The Prime Minister talks about returning to basics. Will the Government, as part of that policy, go for an investment policy in manufacturing industry, and also for an industrial strategy so that manufacturing industry in the United Kingdom can be restored to the strength and capacity that it enjoyed when the Labour party left office in 1979? If that is not done, will not there be more years of decline and job losses under this Government?

Mr. Heseltine : The basic fact that Opposition Members are quite incapable of understanding is that, throughout the advanced economic world, there has been a shift away from manufacturing. If one looks at this country's record, it can be seen broadly that we have marched in line with other similar economies. [Interruption.] It is no use Opposition Members shouting down the facts. Those facts may not suit their arguments, but Opposition Members will not silence me. They will have to get used to that.

There has been a reduction of 6 per cent. in our GDP percentage since 1979. The House will want to know that until 1987, the equivalent figure for America and for Germany was 4 per cent., for France it was 5 per cent., and for Italy it was 7 per cent. Our output is now rising while the output of other nations is falling.

Mr. Oppenheim : Will my right hon. Friend cast his mind back to those heady days of manufacturing might in the 1970s when the Labour Government were implementing their industrial strategy? At that time, British Steel was the world's largest loss-maker, British Leyland was the butt of international jokes, multinational car firms were falling over themselves to transfer production overseas, manufacturing output fell--

Madam Speaker : Order. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to make a speech, he should try to catch my eye in the debate that will follow, and I shall try to call him to speak in it, but I ask him to put a question now.

Mr. Oppenheim : Is my right hon. Friend also aware that, in the 1980s, we were top of the manufacturing, productivity and growth leagues and second only to Japan in manufacturing output--

Madam Speaker : Order. I have given the hon. Gentleman a warning. I might call him if he tries to catch my eye in the debate afterwards, but I need a question now.

Column 442

Mr. Oppenheim : What is my right hon. Friend going to do about it?

Mr. Heseltine : I hope, Madam Speaker, that if you do call my hon. Friend, it will be after me because otherwise I shall have nothing left to say. What I shall do about it is to listen carefully to what he has to say in the debate.

Defence-related Manufacturing

9. Mr. Chisholm : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is his latest estimate of the number of people employed in defence-related manufacturing employment.

Mr. Sainsbury : The latest estimate published by the Ministry of Defence is that in 1991-92 United Kingdom defence-related manufacturing employment was around 410,000.

Mr. Chisholm : Does the Minister agree that that is a large and highly skilled group of workers, who must be kept in manufacturing employment? Will the Government therefore abandon their hands-off approach to defence diversification and start by accepting the recommendation of the Select Committee on Trade and Industry on that subject in its recent aerospace report? When considering the EC Konver bids, will the Government give sympathetic consideration to the submission from the Lothian region, where almost 20 per cent. of manufacturing jobs are dependent on defence orders?

Mr. Sainsbury : On the latter point, I can assure the hon. Gentleman that all the Konver bids being considered today will be given careful scrutiny by the committee. On his first point, I agree that defence employees form a skilled group of employees with many and varied skills which we want to see used to the best advantage. The one sure way to ensure that that did not happen would be for the Government to decide what should happen to them, rather than for their employers, the companies, to make their own commercial decisions. We are not in the business of telling management how to run their companies. We are in the business of encouraging management by providing the right environment for them to succeed.

Mr. Wilkinson : Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the saddest casualties of the reduction in defence orders was the receivership of Swan Hunter shipbuilders at Wallsend? Can he give the House an assurance that his talks with Commissioner Karel Van Miert about the absurd Community regulations that prohibit that company from obtaining intervention funding for commercial shipbuilding will lead to the lifting of that regulation, so that other shareholders will have a chance to invest in Swan Hunter, and there will be a future for that company and for jobs on the Tyne?

Mr. Sainsbury : First, I agree with my hon. Friend about what a sad day it was when Swan Hunter went into the hands of the

administrators. We continue to hope that those administrators will be successful in finding a buyer for the company so that shipbuilding can continue on the Tyne. My hon. Friend made an important point about the shipbuilding intervention fund, a matter on which the Commission has to agree because it is a state aid. I had useful discussions with Commissioner Van Miert last week. Our negotiations are continuing and I hope that we

Column 443

shall be able to bring the matter to a conclusion relatively shortly. I believe that we have a strong case in respect of Swan Hunter.

Ms Eagle : Can the Minister confirm whether a similar approach has been made on behalf of Cammell Laird shipyard? Both the current owners and the potential buyers, who have so far failed to secure more than 1,000 jobs on Merseyside--already a high unemployment area--have all agreed that with access to the intervention fund Cammell Laird could have remained open. If such an approach has not been made, why has it not, as the survival of shipbuilding is as important on the Mersey as it is on the Tyne?

Mr. Sainsbury : I can assure the hon. Lady that the original approaches to the Commission in July were in respect of all the warship building yards covered by the original agreement about subsidies. Because the circumstances of each yard differ, it has been necessary to focus particularly on discussions in respect of Swan Hunter. My latest meeting with Commissioner Van Miert was solely in respect of Swan Hunter.

Domestic Telephones

10. Mr. Ian Bruce : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what proportion of homes now possess a telephone ; and what was the proportion in 1979.

Mr. McLoughlin : In 1979, 67 per cent. of households were connected to a telephone. The latest figures show that 89 per cent. of households are now connected, which represents a 33 per cent. increase.

Mr. Bruce : I wonder whether in his busy day my hon. Friend might have a chance to read the Second and Third Reading debates and the speeches made by Opposition Members when we were discussing the Telecommunications Bill. He may well find that the predictions that were made by the Opposition about privatisation have all been proved to be totally untrue. I should like to encourage my hon. Friend to continue the Government's policy of extending the number of people getting into the telecommunications market so that we can not only continue to have a successful industry but also provide the services that consumers clearly want.

Mr. McLoughlin : I am not sure that it would do much good if I re- read those speeches, but I recommend that Opposition Members do so because they ought to see the way in which their forecasts have so miserably failed to come to fruition. The facts are that to have a telephone installed in 1979, at today's prices, cost £188. Today, that connection cost is £99.

Mr. Ronnie Campbell : Many of my constituents have telephones and they keep calling me and telling me about the rotten Government and what they are doing. When will the Minister take a hand to British Telecom and ask it to cut the price for the installation of telephones for pensioners? The cost is enormous--it costs almost £200 for pensioners to have a telephone installed. Is not it about time that the Minister did something about that?

Mr. McLoughlin : I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman does not seem to have been able to pick up the telephone to BT. The figure that he has just given--and which I gave in my last answer--shows how much he is out of touch. As

Column 444

I have said, to install a telephone in 1979 would have cost £188 at today's prices. BT has just reduced the connection charge to £99. I hope that you, Madam Speaker, will now give the hon. Gentleman a chance to get up and welcome that and the privatisation of British Telecom.

Mr. Peter Ainsworth : Will my hon. Friend confirm that there has also been a substantial increase in the number of payphones in the past 10 years? Does he agree that the telecommunications industry provides a classic example of exactly what deregulation can achieve?

Mr. McLoughlin : I am grateful to my hon. Friend. That was another scare being touted by the Opposition at the time of

privatisation--that somehow all rural phones and mobile phones would cease to exist. The fact is that public phone boxes are working.

Mr. Cousins : Does the Minister not know that there are fewer telephone lines in British homes than in most European countries? The Minister talked about installation charges. Is he not aware of the extortionate installation deposits which are levied in addition to installation charges, particularly in some of the tough inner-city areas? What is he doing about the antique pricing structures and the rank overcharging which mean that British telephone lines are used a third less than telephone lines in the United States? What is he doing to create a mass market in telephones which link the screen to the telephone rather than confining it to yuppies?

Mr. McLoughlin : I honestly do not know where to start in answering the hon. Gentleman's question. When we were privatising BT, the Opposition predicted that prices would go up. In fact, they have fallen by 27 per cent. so far as BT is concerned. There has been a greater increase in competition, with cable companies investing massive amounts of money in this country because they see that as an opportunity to develop their industry. They are providing telephone services, too. It is amazing that the Opposition spokesman can find nothing on which to attack the Government but the leading companies in this country.

Manufacturing, Leicester

11. Mr. Janner : To ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will take steps to assist manufacturing industry in the city of Leicester.

Mr. Sainsbury : My Department already has in place a number of schemes that are helping manufacturing industries and other companies in Leicester and elsewhere.

Mr. Janner : I am sure that the Minister is aware of the awful troubles afflicting Leicester's traditional industries--hosiery, textiles and, in particular, footwear--and the massive job losses which have resulted, but is he aware that, despite reductions in interest rates, those companies that are trying to rebuild are having enormous problems raising capital, whether from the banks, venture capital or otherwise? Will the Minister undertake to look into that problem, which affects not only Leicester and the east midlands, but manufacturers throughout the country?

Mr. Sainsbury : I congratulate the hon. and learned Gentleman on being the first Opposition Member to say anything during this Question Time which has even slightly implied that something good has happened, such as a reduction in interest rates. As he knows, that reduction

Column 445

is a benefit to businesses in his constituency and elsewhere. With regard to small businesses, I am sure that the hon. and learned Gentleman would also welcome the fact that 400,000 new businesses have started up this year. We wish to continue to provide an environment which will encourage the creation of businesses and enable them to succeed and grow.

Mr. Garnier : Is my right hon. Friend aware that, like the hon. and learned Member for Leicester, West (Mr. Janner), I have constituents who work in manufacturing, textile and hosiery businesses? Is he further aware that many textile, hosiery and engineering businesses in my constituency are thriving and that in my constituency we have the lowest unemployment figure in the county? Does he agree that we have such a happy picture to paint because of the increasing deregulation, which is being welcomed by business men, because of lower interest rates and because the Government have been fighting hard to keep the social chapter off the backs of British business men?

Mr. Sainsbury : I am delighted to hear from my hon. Friend about the success of some of his businesses. He confirms the point that, in the right conditions, well-run businesses will flourish, expand and create more employment. I congratulate the textile industry on the success that it is achieving in exports, particularly in the wool and best quality textile markets.

Retail Sector

12. Mr. Booth : To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the change in the performance of the retail sector since 1992.

The Minister for Energy (Mr. Tim Eggar) : Retail sales figures issued last week for October showed a year-on-year increase of 3.2 per cent. in volume and 5.5 per cent. in value.

Mr. Booth : Putting the vexed issue of Sunday trading on one side for another occasion, what proposals will the Government bring forward to help small shopkeepers by deregulating?

Mr. Eggar : As I am sure my hon. Friend will understand, I cannot prejudge the contents of the deregulation Bill or anything that might be in the Budget statement of my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. However, we are acutely conscious of the need to ensure that the retail sector is truly competitive and we know that there must be a particular emphasis on reducing red tape for smaller businesses, whether in the retail sector or elsewhere.

Exports

13. Mr. Austin Mitchell : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what has been the percentage change to the volume of exports of manufacturers to (a) other EC countries and (b) the rest of the world since August 1992.

Mr. Needham : The volume of United Kingdom exports of manufactures to other EC countries was 0.3 per cent. higher in the three months ended August 1993, compared with the same period a year earlier. The volume of manufacturing exports to the rest of the world increased by 13.8 per cent. over the same period, resulting in an overall increase of 6.2 per cent.

Column 446

Mr. Mitchell : On those figures, the Minister accepts that our trade in manufactures with the rest of the world is doing much better, thanks to the fact that our devaluation in relation to the rest of the world was much greater than it was against the EEC. On the other hand, we are doing less well against the EEC because of the surreptitious policy of shadowing the deutschmark, which in real terms has brought the real exchange rate back to the figure before wonderful Wednesday in 1992. Does that not mean that almost half our trade in manufactures in volume terms is now outside the EEC and we need a much bigger fall in interest rates to get the pound down to a competitive level in Europe?

Mr. Needham : The recovery in this country happened in the second quarter of 1992, before we came out of the exchange rate mechanism. It may not have occurred to the hon. Gentleman that the major reasons why our exports to Europe are not doing so well as they are to the rest of the world is because--

Mr. Mitchell : Of the pound.

Mr. Needham : It has nothing to do with that. It is because Europe is in deep recession. Our volumes have increased in Europe. As for the rest of the world, the hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. We have done remarkably well. The Government are working with British industry to ensure that we are making export credit available and that we have a long-term strategy with industry to maximise opportunities outside the EC as well as in it. The hon. Gentleman has accepted that those figures prove that. On that basis, he will congratulate us.

Mr. Paice : Does my hon. Friend agree that it is amazing that there is relative silence about the exceptional export figures, particularly to the rest of the world? Would my hon. Friend like to take this opportunity to note a very traditional manufacturing company in my constituency, Standens of Ely? That company has been fabricating materials for export to the far east and the Pacific rim, with considerable help from my hon. Friend's Department. Should not such achievement be sung about from the highest mountains?

Mr. Needham : My hon. Friend has given one example. I am sure that an endless series of my right hon. and hon. Friends could give similar examples, as could Opposition Members if they searched their telephone books and listened to their industrial constituents. British capital goods companies have set themselves a target to double their exports to non-OECD countries in the next few years from £10 billion a year to £20 billion a year. That is the answer to Opposition Members on the resurgence of manufacturing in this country.

Mr. Bell : The Minister has referred to export credit. What would he tell exporters who increase their competitiveness and productivity, yet when it comes to export credit guarantees look askance at Europe and see what they think are more competitive rates? The President of the Board of Trade said at the Confederation of British Industry conference that our rates were broadly in line. Is the Minister aware of the anxiety of exporters who fear that the European Commission is looking at a new directive designed to create a level playing field for export credit guarantees which they believe is tilted towards the French? Will he give the House an assurance that in relation to that

Column 447

directive and the negotiations, the Department of Trade and Industry will play an active part, with a strategy for trade and for industry, and not leave it to the Treasury with a strategy for money?

Mr. Needham : When it comes to export guarantees, as the hon. Gentleman knows, we have increased the cover by £2.5 billion, we have reduced the premium rates by 25 per cent., we have several markets back on cover and we have increased short-term insurance cover by £1.4 billion. British industry and commerce are much better placed than they were before. However, I accept that it is vital that we are not the only ones playing on the level playing field. Any directives from the Community or any proposals that come forwardindustry receives the maximum support possible. That is what we have been doing and we shall continue to do it.

Deregulation

14. Mr. French : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what have been the findings of each of the deregulation task forces set up last March.

Mr. Neil Hamilton : More than 600 proposals for removing unecessary burdens are being put forward by the seven business task forces. The eighth task force, on the voluntary sector and charities, will report shortly. I expect to be able to publish the contents of the deregulation task forces' investigation documents as soon as possible.

Mr. French : Has my hon. Friend had an opportunity to read the General, Municipal, Boilermakers and Allied Trades Union publication entitled "Freedom to Kill? The case against deregulation", in which it is argued that the Government are endeavouring to weaken the laws that protect employees against death, injury and disease and give unscrupulous employers the right to kill? Will my hon. Friend join me in condemning the hysterical and emotional language in that publication and confirm that the Government's proposals are reasonable and should not be allowed totally unnecessarily to cause anxiety?

Mr. Hamilton : My hon. Friend is perfectly correct, but he must remember that where the Opposition and their trade union allies are concerned criticism is never inhibited by ignorance. This is a good example because the Government do not have any firm proposals in the area. The deregulation task forces have made their suggestions for deregulation. We are not obliged to accept them, but it would be sensible to debate the proposals in an adult way ; then we can take a balanced view of their desirability. To condemn things out of hand, on the basis of emotion, hysteria, shroud waving and headline grabbing is not exactly an adult approach for an Opposition.

Mr. Illsley : Will the Minister tell the House why local authorities were excluded from the deregulation task forces? Would it not have been sensible to allow local authority trading standards officers to be part of them, as they are the people best placed to determine which regulations are redundant and which are still necessary?

Mr. Hamilton : I have to tell the hon. Gentleman that I spent the whole of yesterday afternoon in Bristol, at a

Column 448

conference to which we had invited all the local authorities and trading standards departments in the south-west.It was the fourth such conference to be held in England during the past few months--the others were in Manchester, Newcastle and London. No one from local government has been excluded from the deregulation exercise. Local government has an important role to play in making constructive proposals of its own and we are inviting it to do so. Unlike that from Opposition Members, we have had a very constructive response.

Small Businesses

16. Mr. Thomason : To ask the President of the Board of Trade when he last met the Institute of Directors to discuss small businesses.

Mr. Heseltine : I met representatives of the Institute of Directors last night when I spoke at their annual dinner on a number of issues, including small businesses.

Mr. Thomason : Does my right hon. Friend agree that many small businesses continue to require assistance in management and marketing? Will his Department continue to ensure that support is provided to them in various ways? Does he agree that that should be seen as part of the extension of an enterprise culture, which is so derided by the Opposition?

Mr. Heseltine : I am grateful to my hon. Friend and I very much accept the thrust of his questions. I am considering the basis of the services that we provide, especially the more intense back-up for small and medium-sized firms that the Business Link organisation will provide. I hope to be able to say something about that shortly.

Mr. Turner : Has the President of the Board of Trade received representations from companies in the west midlands regarding the inordinate delays in receiving appraisals through the regional selective assistance policy? That is causing some concern in the west midlands. It is taking more than four weeks for the initial appraisal to be made, which is causing consternation to companies, and I believe that the delay is being caused by staffing problems. We need more staff in that department. Also, market testing is creating great problems in that area.

Mr. Heseltine : The hon. Member is asking two questions. About £700 million of Government expenditure was market tested last year, as a result of which we have achieved an ongoing annual saving of £100 million. As to his first question, I do not believe that the service that we provide in dealing with those grants is the subject of widespread criticism. If it were, I or my right hon. Friend the Minister for Industry would have heard about it many times. However, if the hon. Member knows of a case that may not have received prompt attention I hope that he will bring it to my attention.

Mr. Nicholls : Does my right hon. Friend agree that many small businesses in the tourist sector are concerned about over-regulation, especially the package holiday directive? Can he give us any hint as to whether that might be one of the regulations that could be considered for review?

Mr. Heseltine : My hon. Friend will know that the essence of the exercise that we are carrying out is to study

Column 449

all aspects of laws, regulations and practices, whether from Whitehall, European directives, or the practices of local authorities. In essence, my hon. Friend will find that we have looked at, and will continue to look at, the area that he has drawn to our attention.

Mr. Robin Cook : If the President of the Board of Trade is serious about helping small businesses, will he acknowledge that, in survey after survey, they cite late payment as their biggest problem? Is he aware that small businesses have to pay their bills, on average, 10 days before they get paid by big businesses? So why does the Conservative party, alone among the major parties, refuse to accept the case for a statutory right to interest on late payments? If interest on late payment works for the Inland Revenue, why not for small businesses? Or does the Conservative party's interest in small businesses stop short of offending its friends in big business?

Mr. Heseltine : No, that is not our position. This is a matter on which we have made many statements and conducted a great deal of consultation. We realise that it is a matter of concern to small businesses, and we are actively considering it.

Manufacturing Industry

18. Mr. Robert Hughes : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is his estimate of the growth of manufacturing industry for the year 1992-93.

Mr. Sainsbury : My right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer will publish new forecasts of manufacturing output when he presents his Budget to the House on 30 November. However, it is very encouraging that manufacturing output, manufacturing productivity and manufacturing investment all rose in the last 12 months.

Mr. Hughes : Surely the Minister is aware that, according to the last published figures, manufacturing industry grew by only 1 per cent. in the previous 12 months. Does not his answer mask the massive decline in manufacturing industry that took place during a period when the Government continually denied that we were going into recession, even though we were already deep in one? Will the Minister now stop complacently pretending that the recovery has taken hold and introduce a proper strategy for investment-led growth in manufacturing, which is the only way the country can get out of its balance of payments problems?

Mr. Sainsbury : Manufacturing output rose by 1.6 per cent. over the past 12 months. I would have hoped that that would be welcome to the hon. Gentleman, in the light of the decline in many of our major export markets in continental Europe. The sort of policies proposed by the party that he supports--saddling manufacturing industry with the burdens and restrictions that would follow from the social chapter--would be likely to stifle any further growth in output more quickly than anything else.

Mr. Clifton-Brown : Although I welcome the growth of manufacturing output last year and predictions of more growth next year, may I ask my right hon. Friend to point out to his colleagues in the Council of Ministers how much labour on-costs, such as those from the social chapter, will hamper manufacturing industry? Will he point out to them

Column 450

that it is essential that those labour on- costs be kept to a minimum so that both this country and the rest of Europe can remain competitive with the rest of the world?

Mr. Sainsbury : It was my impression at a meeting of Council of Industry Ministers last week that a number of colleagues in other Community countries are now conscious of the points that my hon. Friend makes and are perhaps beginning to have second thoughts about the wisdom of some of the things to which they have signed up.

Dr. Berry : Is the Minister genuinely surprised that manufacturing output is higher this year than last, given the appalling state of the economy last year? Is it not more relevant to recognise that the trade deficit in manufactured goods at this point in the trade cycle has never been worse in recent economic history? How does he explain that?

Mr. Sainsbury : I hope that the hon. Gentleman will be prepared to welcome the changes since 1981. Manufacturing output is up by nearly a quarter, and productivity and exports are up by nearly three quarters. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade has already pointed out--perhaps the hon. Gentleman was not listening or was not in his place at the time--that it is normal for advanced economies to experience a decline in the proportion of manufacturing in their total gross domestic product. This country is no exception.

Skeletal Implants Testing

20. Mr. Flynn : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the total estimated cost of the development of life-time predicative test methods for the skeletal implants project.

Mr. Sainsbury : The total estimated cost is £750,000. The Department of Trade and Industry will provide up to £472,000, 63 per cent., and industry £278,000, 37 per cent.

Mr. Flynn : Is the Minister aware that this project is of enormous importance and will bring relief to many millions of people in this country if successful? Will he investigate the tendering procedure as it is claimed that many organisations with great expertise in this area were excluded?

Mr. Sainsbury : I am not aware of the point that the hon. Gentleman makes. I have received no formal complaints about the tendering process. If the hon. Gentleman has a specific point that he would like to bring to my attention, I will certainly follow it up if he writes to me.

Konver Initiative

22. Mr. Anthony Coombs : To ask the President of the Board of Trade what grants have been made in the current year under the Konver initiative.

Next Section

Home Page