| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. David Maclean (Penrith and The Border): On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker. What advice can you give the House on the debacle of that vote? Is there a case for amending Standing Orders? A minority Opposition party tabled a motion criticising the main Opposition party and urging us to be competent, but the Liberal Democrats were so incompetent that they failed to provide tellers, and we had to do the work that they were too incompetent to do.
Mr. Deputy Speaker: None of that is a matter for the Chair. The procedure followed was perfectly in order.
SELECT COMMITTEES (QUORUM)
Motion made, and Question put,
That, for the remainder of the present Session of Parliament, Standing Order No. 152 (Select committees related to government departments) shall have effect subject to the following modification in line 48, at the end to add--
Hon. Members:
Object.
'(4A) Notwithstanding paragraphs (2) and (4) above, where more than two committees or sub-committees appointed under this order meet concurrently in accordance with paragraph (4)(e) above, the quorum of each such committee or sub-committee shall be two.'.--[Mr. Betts.]
PETITION
Association with Europe (Referendum)
7.15 pm
Mr. David Hinchliffe (Wakefield) rose--
Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Alan Haselhurst): Order. Perhaps the hon. Member for Wakefield (Mr. Hinchliffe) will wait for a moment before presenting his petition. Hon. Members who are not staying to hear it should please leave quickly and quietly. Thank you.
Mr. Hinchliffe: I wish to present a petition signed by my constituent Mr. Bernard Calvert of Linton road, Eastmoor, Wakefield. The petition contains only his signature, but he has expressed a desire for it to be formally presented to the House and I am happy to oblige.
The petition states that, as a citizen of the United Kingdom he has not been consulted in any referendum on our association with Europe since 1975 when a referendum was held to ascertain whether the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland would remain in the European Economic Community, which was known as the Common Market. He says that that has happened notwithstanding what he suggests is the progressive surrender of our national sovereignty since then.
The petition states:
Wherefore your Petitioner prays that your honourable House shall urge the Government to:
13 May 1999 : Column 524
1. introduce legislation providing for a referendum on the United Kingdom's membership of the Common Market:
2. call a Speaker's Conference, to comprise members of the House, academics and others, to decide the formulation of the question to be put to the people of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland at this Referendum:
To lie upon the Table.
3. bear the cost of the aforementioned conference and Referendum through Her Majesty's Treasury and
4. make arrangements for the allocation of equal air time on television, radio and other media to supporters of either side of the question that shall be determined by the aforementioned Conference.
And your Petitioner, as in duty bound, will ever pray, for the continual well being of the House of Commons, the historical defender or our liberties.
Job Losses (Renishaw)
Motion made, and Question proposed, That this House do now adjourn.--[Mr. Betts.]
7.17 pm
Mr. Harry Barnes (North-East Derbyshire): Renishaw is a small, compact community--there are fewer than 1,400 people on the electoral register--which suffered a number of years ago from a pit closure at Renishaw Park, which devastated the community. On 22 April, a foundry went into receivership, which led to 140 people being made redundant. Another 40 people continue to work at the foundry, wondering about their future.
Renishaw foundry is now cosmopolitan. Many people who were employed there came from the constituencyof my right hon. Friend the Member for Chesterfield(Mr. Benn) and a number also came from the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover(Mr. Skinner)--about one third were from my constituency. However, we are talking about more than 140 job losses, as many suppliers and haulage firms will be affected, as will those who are dependent on people in the community having a full wage packet.
Why did the job losses arise in such stark circumstances? The receiver moved in on 22 April and, almost immediately, 140 workers were made redundant. They had not known that that would occur, although they feared that it might. The community was devastated.
In October 1997, Carbo Ltd. leased 5.8 acres out of a 13.4 acre site in Chesterfield, which it leased to a firm that called itself Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd., although the company had previously had nothing to do with the foundry.
The first payment was planned to be £375,000. In July 1998, the new company purchased Renishaw foundry from British Steel for £800,000 and took on British Steel's pension and other liabilities. The land was bought by a company called Renishaw Properties Ltd. for £35,000. However, the major shareholder of Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd. and Renishaw Properties Ltd. is a Mr. Ling. There is a clear connection between the two companies.
In the meantime, Carbo Ltd. persuaded Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd. to relinquish the lease at Chesterfield by waiving the outstanding initial fee of £375,000 and promising £500,000 if any profits were made later from a property deal that it hoped for on the site. I shall deal with the property bonanza later, but it was that favourable arrangement that allowed the company to purchase Renishaw foundry.
In return, Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd. moved about 100 workers and some machinery to the Renishaw foundry, where only 70 workers were then employed. That was completed by the end of 1998. In 1999, and perhaps in the months before, Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd. lost money hand over fist, even though it did not pay any rent in that period to its other half, Renishaw Properties Ltd. No accounts have been recorded in Companies house for Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd. or Renishaw Properties Ltd. I understand that the auditor would not sign the Bryan Donkin accounts because he felt that the company was not viable.
Let us consider the gainers and losers in those interlinked transactions. The workers are clearly losers, with 140 made redundant and 40 facing an insecure
future. The firm's collapse means that they are not entitled to jobseeker's allowance payments for several weeks. They are entitled to a week's redundancy money for each year that they have worked, but as my hon. Friend the Member for Amber Valley (Judy Mallaber) discovered from a question that she tabled, it takes nine weeks on average for the redundancy payments office to deliver payments.
The only substitute for JSA payments is income support on the ground of urgency, yet out of 90 cases in jobcentre areas in north Derbyshire, only six have been given income support so far, and two are due to get it shortly. That is because all income in a household is assessed by a means test. A wife's earnings, or other earnings in the household, are considered for income support purposes. In one case, a wife's disability payments have been taken into account and prevented payment of income support.
The matter has been raised previously by my hon. Friends the Members for Amber Valley and for Erewash (Liz Blackman). In reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Erewash, the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wallasey (Angela Eagle) said:
At present, the ex-workers' pensions seem to be guaranteed. A great deal of work has been done by the trade unions. Indeed many people have tried to assist in this desperate situation--no one more than a local district councillor, Brian Ridgeway. He has been behind much of the activity and organisation to try to help those workers who are in very desperate circumstances.
There are losers, but there will also be clear winners, if things turn out as some people hope. The workers will not be among those winners in any way, unless some miraculous changes take place. The first to gain is Carbo, which has got rid of Bryan Donkin's work force, but it has had to meet no redundancy or other payments. Carbo looks to make a fortune in the future. On 27 July 1998, the chairman of Carbo, Bill Goodall, was reported as saying:
Another winner is British Steel, which sold Renishaw foundry and its land for £835,000 and saved £1.5 million in potential redundancy payments alone. Ex-British Steel workers who were made redundant at Renishaw should also be sharing in British Steel's good fortune.
What about Mr. Ling, who is the key shareholder in Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd. and in Renishaw Properties Ltd.? Is he a gainer or a loser? The assets he seems to have are a potential £500,000 from the property deal in Chesterfield, if it goes through, and rent and other moneys from the ownership of Renishaw Properties Ltd. and from any new firm that the receiver is able to find. His liabilities are any unfulfilled hopes that he may have and the possible loss of the £800,000 that he initially paid out to purchase the company.
I want a Department of Trade and Industry inquiry into all those arrangements, so that we know who is getting what and from whom, and I call for immediate action to clear up the matter of the jobseeker's allowance. It is entirely unacceptable that the people who are at the rough end of the affair should be the former work force. I call for attention to be given to losses incurred by suppliers, hauliers and so on, in the area, so that some help may be given to them. We also need to do all that we can to assist the receiver and to encourage the receiver to find a buyer for the foundry. If there is a buyer the re-employment--even if the conditions change--of some of the work force becomes a significant possibility. If a buyer can be found, we should try to ensure that those who are re-employed are those who are losing their jobs now.
Via the Employment Service, we should give the ex-workers every assistance by ensuring that job opportunities are found for them. I understand that there is some possibility of those who are ex-British Steel workers having access to appointments publicised through British Steel. It is just as well that the fight to save the Eckington jobcentre was successful, because that centre serves Renishaw, Killamarsh, Eckington and the surrounding area, a large part of which is affected by the job losses.
"We are aware that, under existing rules, if money is owed from an insolvent employer, full benefit cannot always be paid immediately to ex-employees claiming Jobseeker's Allowance or Income Support, although payments can be made to avoid hardship.
No announcement has yet been made on proposed changes to the legislation. Today, I received a fax from the Minister for Employment, Welfare to Work and Equal Opportunities, pointing out that that will not occur yet, although there is concern about the matter. I doubt whether my hon. Friend the Minister for Energy and Industry will be able to give a different reply from the one that I received. However, it would be welcome to hear that there was to be urgent consideration of the matter and that an announcement will be made soon of help to overcome a problem that affects many firms going into receivership or into liquidation.
Since this problem came to our attention, we have been working to simplify the complex legislation in this area and we are currently considering proposals for changes to the relevant benefit rules."--[Official Report, 17 December 1998; Vol. 322, c. 715.]
"The new agreement with BDFL"--
that is Bryan Donkin Foundry Ltd.--
"substantially improves the development potential for the Chesterfield site. In due course, the disposal of the enlarged site for development will conclude the group's exit from its former Bryan Donkin business and enable both shareholders and the Company to benefit in the resultant value creation."
Matters have developed since then. Last week, a draft plan was submitted to Chesterfield borough council in order to cash in on those provisions. The company is looking to
create a development in which there will be a hotel, supermarkets, a business centre, a traffic centre and a host of other facilities that will lead to considerable financial developments. At present, it is only a draft plan at an early stage. Chesterfield borough council is obliged by law to undertake a screening process under the 1999 environment assessment regulations. However, if Carbo and its associates gain a fortune, at least the ex-Bryan Donkin workers should have some share when that development takes place.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |