| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Lancashire Aerospace Industry
9. Mr. Pike: To ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will visit the Lancashire aerospace industry to discuss European aircraft collaboration programmes. [2607]
Mr. Lang: I visited the Consortium of Lancashire Aerospace last month, and had a useful meeting with representatives of that important industry.
Mr. Pike: I am glad that the Secretary of State has met the consortium. He will recognise that aerospace is a crucial industry in Lancashire. Would not the Lancashire aerospace industry be helped if British Airways bought more British engines and the Airbus? Will he do everything possible to ensure that Lancashire and Britain get their fair share of work from the European fighter aircraft?
Mr. Lang: The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right. The aerospace industry is extremely important to this country. It employs some 130,000 people, and is the third largest industry in the western world. British Airways' purchasing policy is a matter for that company. Engine makers have to sell their goods in a very competitive market. I am sure that the House will be as pleased as I am with the great success that Rolls-Royce has had recently by selling its Trent engine to Singapore Airlines, in a deal worth more than £1 billion.
Mr. Atkins: Is my right hon. Friend aware that most of my constituents and many of my colleagues representing Lancashire constituencies know only too well how much the Government have done during the past 16 years for the British aerospace industry and will continue so to do? But can he also understand that there is some concern relating to Eurofighter about the proportion of the work share, and will he, along with the Secretary of State for
Defence, continue to press his German counterparts to ensure that the British aerospace industry gets the right share for the number that it has purchased?
Mr. Lang: My hon. Friend draws attention to an important point. The United Kingdom has a good record of collaboration with other countries on aircraft projects of various kinds, starting from Concorde and going through Airbus, Tornado and others. It will be our purpose to ensure that there is a fully justifiable level of British participation in the componency of the Eurofighter.
Mr. Barry Jones: With regard to Airbus, when will the Government formally rejoin the future large aircraft project? Why cannot the Government persuade British Airways to buy Airbus? Will the right hon. Gentleman understand that answers to those questions will be carefully scrutinised by 2,000 of my constituents who work for British Aerospace? It is our greatest industry. Will the Government back it?
Mr. Lang: The Government have extensively backed the industry. As I said earlier, British Airways' purchasing policy is a matter for that company. Airbus is an extremely successful initiative. The 500th A320 was delivered last January and last year Airbus received more orders than Boeing. With regard to the FLA, the United Kingdom will rejoin that programme once certain conditions have been met, in particular the condition that the programme will be managed on a commercial basis.
Mr. Mans: Does my right hon. Friend agree that the most important aerospace project in Lancashire is Eurofighter? Does he further agree that the Opposition's defence policies would almost certainly mean that that project would be cancelled, and the industrial consequences to the county of Lancashire would be horrible?
Mr. Lang: My hon. Friend is absolutely right. The Eurofighter is important not only for our defences but for our aerospace industry, and in both respects the Government's commitment to it is, I think, welcome.
Nuclear Privatisation
10. Mr. Clapham: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to bring the date for privatisation of the nuclear industry forward. [2608]
Mr. Lang: The privatisation of the nuclear industry remains on track for the summer of 1996.
Mr. Clapham: I am pleased to hear that the Secretary of State is not bringing forward the date of privatisation of the nuclear industry. However, is he aware that the proposed two nuclear companies will provide 24 per cent. of the United Kingdom's electricity and that that will all be base load electricity which will be bid into the pool at zero? Therefore, those companies will be in an advantageous position if they are allowed to diversify into gas. If they do diversify into gas, their gas units will compete not with their nuclear capacity but with other gas units and other coal units, possibly pushing coal further down the grid. In such a situation, will the Minister ensure that there are restrictions on the new nuclear companies to provide only nuclear generation, or will they be free to distort the energy economy?
Mr. Lang: I cannot give the hon. Gentleman the undertaking that he seeks. This is a competitive industry
and it is important that, both domestically and industrially, electricity is supplied at the most competitive price available.
Dr. Michael Clark: While we are discussing the nuclear industry and privatisation, would my right hon. Friend care to comment on the significant contribution of the late John Collier, latterly chairman of Nuclear Electric, and his significant contribution during many years to the nuclear industry in general and the privatisation of that industry in particular?
Mr. Lang: I am grateful to my hon. Friend for giving me the opportunity to pay tribute to the late John Collier, who served Nuclear Electric with great distinction and who worked extremely positively towards the nuclear privatisation and the successful future of that industry to which we all look forward. He will be sadly missed.
Mr. Hardy: What public liabilities will continue after privatisation of the nuclear industry?
Mr. Lang: I think that the hon. Gentleman knows that the Magnox liabilities will be retained with the Magnox stations, and the other liabilities will pass into the private sector with the nuclear stations.
Heavy Electrical Product Exports
11. Mr. Pawsey: To ask the President of the Board of Trade what is the estimated annual value of heavy electrical product exports; and what are the principal markets. [2609]
Mr. Nelson: Exports of heavy electrical products, comprising electrical equipment for power generation, transmission and distribution, were £130 million in 1994--up 47 per cent. on 1990. The principal markets are the United States of America and the far east.
Mr. Pawsey: I thank my hon. Friend for that extremely encouraging reply. Clearly, British manufacturing industry is in good heart and very successful at selling abroad. Is my hon. Friend aware that GEC Alsthom in Rugby produces probably the finest heavy generating sets in the world? Will he join me in congratulating the management and work force on their exemplary record? Does he agree that the success of GEC has contributed a great deal to the splendid figures that he has just announced?
Mr. Nelson: I am happy to join my hon. Friend in the congratulations he gives GEC Alsthom. It is a great success story. I know that my hon. Friend visited the plant in his constituency recently, as did my right hon. Friend the Minister for Industry and Energy. GEC Alsthom and other companies involved in power generation and transmission, such as Rolls-Royce and Davy, represent one of the great British success stories. We very much hope that it will continue.
Mr. Bell: We of course welcome the fact that exports of heavy electrical goods have increased to £130 million. That is good news for the hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth (Mr. Pawsey). Why is the Minister so complacent when, for every £100 we export, we import £110 and our manufacturing exports have been less than our imports every year since 1983? The French have an export surplus of £7 billion; we have a deficit of £11.4 billion as of August, and confidence in our
exporters is at its lowest level since August 1993. That is not according to those on the Labour Front Bench but according to the Confederation of British Industry. Is it not a matter of perception and reality--the perception of the Government and the reality of our exporters?
Mr. Nelson: This Minister is not at all complacent about our export performance. I want Britain to be in the black on the visible account and the invisible account. I was simply pointing out a great success on which the House should be united, instead of constantly listening to the dreary litany of failures to which the Opposition would spuriously draw attention. That particular sector is leading the country in record exports. Last year, we had a substantial surplus of £8.9 billion, not just on the visible account but on the invisible account. We are making more money than we are spending on the capital account and in returns on our investments abroad. It is good news for Britain. Let us hear a little more of it from the hon. Gentleman.
Mr. Ian Bruce: Will my hon. Friend redouble the efforts, which are already extremely well appreciated by industry, to ensure that our exports are sold abroad, particularly in China, Nepal and Indonesia? Does he understand that it is important for the Government to give British industry that support, to counteract the negative vibes from the Labour party?
Mr. Nelson: My hon. Friend hits the nail on the head. It is important to support, advise and enable those companies to succeed abroad. We endeavour to do that through a range of support services, including domestic policies that enable them to expand investment in their own markets. Through assistance such as the overseas projects fund, we endeavour to help them with pump-priming to get the business in the first place.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |