THIS HAS BEEN UPDATED ON 1 NOVEMBER 1995 THE PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES
OFFICIAL REPORT
IN THE FOURTH SESSION OF THE FIFTY-FIRST PARLIAMENT OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND
[WHICH OPENED 27 APRIL 1992]
FORTY-FOURTH YEAR OF THE REIGN OF HER MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II
SIXTH SERIES
VOLUME 268
SECOND VOLUME OF SESSION 1995-96
House of Commons
Monday 4 December 1995
The House met at half-past Two o'clock
PRAYERS
[Madam Speaker in the Chair]
Oral Answers to Questions
WALES
Campbell Soups
1. Mr. Campbell-Savours: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what approaches he has received from the Campbell Soups company about location in Wales.[1856]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. Gwilym Jones): None.
Mr. Campbell-Savours: May I suggest to the Minister that, if Campbell Soups does knock on his door, he should avoid the company like the plague? Will he reflect on the fact that it paid £58.6 million for a highly profitable top-class company that was making an excellent product in my constituency and, within 11 weeks, announced the closure of the factory? Will he join me in calling on the people of Wales to boycott the products of the company, and in particular Campbell's soups? When they walk into a supermarket and see the product on the shelf, they must turn away and say, "That product is not for me." Customers should boycott it until the decision affecting Maryport in my constituency is reviewed.
Mr. Jones: I can assure the hon. Gentleman that if Campbell Soups was to make an application for financial assistance to the Welsh Office, we would look carefully at it, as we do any such application.
Government Support
2. Mr. Harry Greenway: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what level of per capita support is paid to Wales from central Government; what were the figures in May 1979 in current prices; and if he will make a statement.[1857]
The Secretary of State for Wales (Mr. William Hague): In 1993-94, the latest year for which figures are available, identifiable general Government expenditure in Wales was estimated to be £3,913 per head. Directly comparable figures are not available for 1979 because of changes in the definition and coverage of identifiable territorial public expenditure. However, on the basis of the best available data, the figure for 1979-80 is estimated to be £2,791 per head at 1993-94 prices.
Mr. Greenway: Does my right hon. Friend agree that those figures are remarkable? The Conservative Government have brought not only great material benefit to the people of Wales, but political and spiritual benefit. Does my right hon. Friend agree that the people of Wales would be very unwise to overturn this Conservative Government?
Mr. Hague: My hon. Friend is as perceptive and right as ever. On the best available data, which I gave a few moments ago, spending per head in Wales is 40 per cent. higher in real terms than it was in 1979 and 13 per cent. higher per head than in England. Opposition Members sometimes call for still higher expenditure, but they had better think about how such calls fit with the 10p tax rate called for by the hon. Member for Dunfermline, East (Mr. Brown).
Mr. Ray Powell: Will the Secretary of State tell the House and the nation whether the figures he has just given to the House include the £2.5 billion that would come to Wales from the Treasury in normal circumstances--under the Barnett rules introduced in 1970?
Mr. Hague: Yes. The figures include the money provided under the long-established formula that has most
recently been called the Barnett formula. The amount of money dealt with by the formula stands at 6.02 per cent. of spending elsewhere in the United Kingdom, and that continues to be the case.
Mr. Sweeney: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the figures he has given today fully justify Wales having a Secretary of State at Westminster battling in the interests of Wales, rather than a useless assembly based in Cardiff?
Mr. Hague: Yes. My hon. Friend underlines the importance of strong representation for Wales in this House and within the Government. It would certainly be undermined by the roomful of hot air that Opposition Members want to establish in Cardiff.
Mr. Ron Davies: We would love to have a Secretary of State battling for Wales in Westminster--the trouble is that we do not.
Will the Secretary of State confirm the figures in last week's Welsh Office press release that said that spending on his programmes in Wales for the coming financial year is to be cut by £100 million in real terms? Is it not also the case that the problems caused by the cuts are compounded by the inability of the Welsh Office to maximise support from the European Union? Is he aware that there is a massive backlog of applications to the objective 2 and objective 5b programmes and that millions of pounds of investment is being prejudiced by delays in his Department? Instead of wandering about Wales looking for photo opportunities, should not the Secretary of State spend more time sorting out the deficiencies in his Department?
Mr. Hague:
To deal with the point about objective 5b first, the coverage in the press today is misleading. There is no question of Wales losing in terms of resources provided through the European Community and there are no unnecessary delays within my Department. Next year, public expenditure in Wales overall will reach its highest level ever. There will not be a real cut of £100 million, because the proceeds from Housing for Wales will be £65 million, as the hon. Gentleman is aware. If he is dissatisfied with the proposed level of expenditure, it is incumbent on him to say what he thinks the level of expenditure should be. He is reticent on that, which would be understandable if it were not so unusual. It is time for him to tell the House how much he thinks should be spent in Wales next year.
3. Mr. Wigley:
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plans he has to meet the chief executive of Invest in Britain to discuss his policy towards attracting inward investment into Wales.[1858]
Mr. Hague:
None at present, but my officials and the Welsh Development Agency are in regular contact with the Invest in Britain Bureau. I have been assured by the bureau that it does all it can to attract inward investment to Wales.
Mr. Wigley:
Is the Secretary of State aware that the number of new jobs provided, and existing jobs safeguarded, by inward investment in Wales dropped from 11.8 per cent. of the United Kingdom figure in 1992 to 5.6 per cent. in the last year for which figures are available? In those circumstances, does it not appear that
Mr. Hague:
I am certainly aware that the figures for the past year or two have not been as good as those in previous years, although the figure that the hon. Gentleman quoted is the lowest possible figure that could be obtained by calculating the number of jobs safeguarded or created in different statistical ways. There is a more competitive environment in inward investment. That makes it all the more important for us to renew our efforts. I have been doing that during the past few months. I acknowledge the efforts that the hon. Gentleman made during his recent trip to the United States. I shall do my utmost to ensure that the Invest in Britain Bureau works for the whole of Britain, but I have no reason at the moment to think that it does not.
Sir Wyn Roberts:
Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Government's record on inward investment in Wales since 1979 is absolutely first class, thanks to the Invest in Britain Bureau, Welsh Development International and others? Will he give us an assurance that he will continue to give top priority to inward investment rather than to any distractions caused by the devolutionary diversions of the Labour party?
Mr. Hague:
Yes, I can give my right hon. Friend that assurance. Those devolutionary distractions would be damaging to the prospects for inward investment were they to be brought to fruition. As my right hon. Friend says, the bureau has done a great deal to encourage inward investment in the past--as has he, as have my predecessors and as has the position of the United Kingdom as an economy with lower taxes on companies and employment and less regulation than other European economies.
Mr. Alan Williams:
Will the Secretary of State bear it in mind that the imbalance is not only between England and Wales but within Wales? Will he talk to the Welsh Development Agency about the gross failure to bring much of the inward investment beyond Bridgend? Does he recognise that there is an astonishing imbalance in the amount of money and resources that come into my part of Wales, which can be rectified only by structural changes? Will he now consider reintroducing development area status for parts of south-west Wales?
Mr. Hague:
I understand the right hon. Gentleman's question. The hon. Member for Bridgend (Mr. Griffiths) is smiling about the success of Bridgend, but I should like to encourage the WDA and others to ensure that development takes place wherever we can encourage it-- away from the M4 and A55 corridors as well as in those areas, where it has already been well established. That is one of our stated policies. We shall continue to try to attract inward investment to all parts of Wales, but I cannot give a commitment that the Government will review assisted area status generally in the foreseeable future.
Mr. Jacques Arnold:
Bearing it in mind that inward investment into the United Kingdom as a proportion of
Mr. Hague:
Yes. My hon. Friend is right. Since 1980, more than £7 billion of inward investment has come to Wales. The United Kingdom as a whole continues to be an international magnet for investment--because of the policies that the Government have pursued, and they are precisely the policies on tax, regulation and other matters which Opposition Members would be likely to change.
Mr. Ron Davies:
In reply to my previous supplementary question, the Secretary of State referred to a report in this morning's Western Mail about the delay in processing European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund--FEOGA--applications. That was not the question that I asked, although I am grateful for the answer. If the Secretary of State shares my concern about the need to get inward investment to rural Wales and to improve the economy of rural Wales, will he undertake to examine the further delays in his Department's processing of FEOGA applications? Will he confirm that Wales has been denied some £56 million of expenditure from the programme because of his personal failure to make available matching funding? Given that the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food makes the payments in England, and that the right hon. Gentleman's constituents in Richmond are therefore eligible for them, what justification does he have for denying them to my constituents in Wales?
Mr. Hague:
As I mentioned earlier, press coverage on the point is misleading. There is no question of Wales losing out on these resources. The overwhelming majority of applications in the first round, which were spoken of in the press, have secured the necessary public sector funding. I recognise, as the hon. Gentleman rightly says, that the programme is a valuable opportunity for Wales and I am aware of the arrangements that operate elsewhere in the UK. If I think that any additional action is necessary to ensure that the most can be made of the resources, I shall make an announcement on Wednesday.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |