Confederation of British Industry
Q1. Mr. Duffy
asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his meeting with the CBI on 12th February.
The Prime Minister (Mr. Harold Wilson)
Yes, Sir. There was a full discussion of the Industry Bill, in which the representatives of the CBI outlined their anxieties on some of the provisions in the Bill. The Government undertook to consider the points that were raised, and the discussion on them was resumed at our meeting yesterday. I have arranged next week to hold a similar consultative meeting with the Economic Committee of the TUC. There will be a further meeting with the CBI in the near future.
Mr. Duffy
Did my right hon. Friend impress upon the CBI at both meetings the fact that the extension of industrial democracy is a prime aim of the Industry Bill and that the present anxiety of the CBI to restrict the disclosure of information leaves it open to the charge either that it wants to preserve the monopoly of information within the firm or otherwise preserve the prerogative of management?
The Prime Minister
There was a full discussion on both occasions about disclosure of information. I am 100 per cent. in support of much greater disclosure of information in these matters. Nevertheless, since the talks were confidential, I cannot disclose any information about what was said.
Mr. Churchill
Will the right hon. Gentleman explain what he means when he says, in the phrase attributed to him in more than one newspaper report of the speech, that the industry White Paper will take precedence over the Bill? How can this come about?
The Prime Minister
I am not quite sure what report the hon. Gentleman is talking about, because it was not a speech. The Question relates to a meeting with the CBI. As to the White Paper, I answered a Question about that on Tuesday. I commend the hon. Gentleman to study it.
Mr. Atkinson
Will my Friend the Prime Minister explain to the House, on [column 697]the question of the disclosure of information, why he agreed with a CBI request to drop from the Industry Bill any reference to the disclosure of imports?
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for his friendly question. I am a little at a loss to know how to answer it, because I do not recall any such discussions with the CBI. My right hon. Friend the Chancellor, who was present on that occasion and who is beside me now, is also at a loss to recollect anything of this kind.
Mrs. Thatcher
Is Harold Wilsonthe right hon. Gentleman aware that some of us have studied his answer on Tuesday and find that, like other answers of his, it is not very clear? Is he aware that in paragraphs 31 and 33 the White Paper gives clear undertakings about the conditions for the acquisition of shares in companies but that the Bill does not reflect those conditions? Is he further aware that while he is saying one thing in his speeches his right hon. Friend Tony Bennthe Secretary of State for Industry is doing another thing in the Industry Bill? Will the Prime Minister give the House an assurance that the Government will table amendments to bring the Bill into line with his undertakings in the White Paper?
The Prime Minister
I am sorry if the right hon. Lady felt that my answer the other day was not clear. It is perfectly clear. What are not clear are the policies of the Conservative Party on almost anything. I have the fullest confidence, however, that under the right hon. Lady's leadership all these things will become clear in time. [Hon. Members: “Answer” .] The right hon. Lady says “Hear, hear” . What are hon. Members complaining about? As for the Question which I answered the other day, the issue was fully discussed yesterday with the CBI. It will be discussed with the TUC. If any amendments are needed for the purpose of clarification or improving the Bill they will be introduced. It would be premature at this stage, while discussions with the CBI and TUC are going on, to say exactly what we would consider as the right policy.
Mrs. Thatcher
The undertakings were quite clear, and it is quite clear that the Bill is not in accord with them. It is the [column 698]Prime Minister's promise which is at stake now.
The Prime Minister
I am grateful to the right hon. Lady, because yesterday I explained to the CBI exactly what I had said in the House. We spent a great deal of time on both the disclosure of information—which was a separate question from what was raised on Tuesday—and the specific question relating to the White Paper. We discussed these matters at some length. When we have a statement to make to the House as a result of our consultations with both the CBI and the TUC we shall make it. If any amendments are necessary to the Bill or if any other form is appropriate, we shall carry those out.
Cleethorpes
Q2. Mr. Brotherton
asked the Prime Minister if he will pay an official visit to Cleethorpes.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to do so, Sir.
Mr. Brotherton
Is the Prime Minister aware that that reply will be received with great regret in Cleethorpes, particularly by the large number of people living there who are engaged in the fishing industry?
Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the grave crisis facing the fishing industry? Will he take steps to divert some of the large sums of money being frittered away on food subsidies to help this most vital industry?
The Prime Minister
I thought that fish was food. I naturally recognise the hon. Gentleman's concern—which is shared by my right hon. and hon. Friends and other hon. Members in that and other areas—about the present situation in the fishing industry. The hon. Gentleman will be glad to know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food has been considering the situation as a matter of urgency. Indeed, I am glad to inform the hon. Gentleman that the Government's decision on this matter was announced an hour ago. Temporary aid will be provided in the form of flat-rate daily payments, varying by class of vessel. [column 699]The total cost of the scheme will be about £6¼ million. My right hon. Friend will be laying the appropriate order before Parliament as soon as possible. I hope that the Opposition will not complain about the increase in Government expenditure which is involved.
Mr. James Johnson
Is my right hon. Friend aware that, while there is not a single fishing vessel in Cleethorpes, there are two other places on the Humber—Hull and Grimsby—which have efficient, international, deep-sea, distant water fishing fleets? What my right hon. Friend said about the Government's decision, announced an hour ago, may be known in Hull and Grimsby. I should like to thank him on behalf of all my colleagues from the Humber fishing ports and other fishing ports for what we hope will be, if I am cautiously optimistic, a shot in the arm for the fishing industry.
The Prime Minister
I thank my hon. Friend for what he included in his question. It may be that there are no fishing vessels actually plying from Cleethorpes, but I think that they go past Cleethorpes. In view of the interest shown by the hon. Member for Louth (Mr. Brotherton), who was not as quick as my hon. Friend in knowing what was really happening in this industry, I think that he is entitled to put that question, because some of his constituents are involved in the industry.
Self-Employed Persons
Q3. Mr. McCrindle
asked the Prime Minister if he will appoint a Minister to be responsible for the interests of the self-employed.
The Prime Minister
I refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Reigate (Mr. Gardiner) on 18th February.—[Vol. 886, c. 341.]
Mr. McCrindle
Is it not incongruous that the Minister responsible for small firms and therefore for thousands of self-employed people should find himself located at the Department of Industry, whose Secretary of State has not always been seen to be the greatest friend of the self-employed? Will he think again and, as in Belgium, consider appointing a Minister through whom the self-employed may make representations on such matters [column 700]as the level of national insurance contributions and the threat to their continued existence from the capital transfer tax?
The Prime Minister
I hope that the hon. Gentleman will accept from me, because of my high regard for him, that some of these questions are now becoming as obsessive about my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry as, a generation ago, Tory questions were about Aneurin Bevan.
Referring to the Belgian situation, it is always a possibility in any country that a Minister should have these responsibilities. The Belgian system was first established in 1906. It has existed in its present form for over 20 years. The precedent was therefore well established in 1970 when the Conservative Government came into office, but they did nothing about it. Still, I notice the interest shown in the question.
Mr. Trotter
Is the Prime Minister aware that the self-employed who are not members of this House have noticed the way which, under this Government, hon. Members of this honourable House have ceased to be self-employed? Will he give an assurance that he regards the self-employed as useful members of the community, that they deserve a fair deal, and that he believes that they are receiving that deal from the Government?
The Prime Minister
The decision to make the change in the position of Members of Parliament was taken not by this Government, but by the Conservative Government of which I think the right hon. Member for Finchley (Mrs. Thatcher) was then a consenting member. We have not yet heard whether there is to be retrospective dissociation on that matter, as on so many others. It was a decision taken by the Conservative Government. I have the greatest pleasure in saying that I think they were right, and we supported them.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Q4. Mr. Stanley
asked the Prime Minister whether he will pay a visit to the headquarters of OECD.
The Prime Minister
I have at present no plans to do so, Sir.
[column 701]Mr. Stanley
Does not the latest OECD survey show that Britain has almost the worst rate of inflation amongst the 24 OECD countries? Will the Prime Minister tell us how long the Government intend to combat inflation in this country using, it seems, only one effective weapon—rising unemployment and mounting short-time working?
The Prime Minister
I totally disagree with the hon. Gentleman. I am interested in his new-found interest in OECD, because the Conservative Party spent the whole of the last election saying that they did not believe in anything that OECD printed or published on inflation. [Interruption.] Yes. The Opposition cannot dissociate themselves completely from all that happened in the past.
I have answered many questions about inflation over the last two or three weeks, but I have not yet heard whether the Conservative Party now supports statutory wage control or not.
Mr. Marten
On the question of overseas investment, should not businessmen under the Treaty of Accession and the Treaty of Rome be free to invest in the Common Market from 1st January this year? Does the Prime Minister know why that has not happened? As it has not happened, should not the Commission have come over just after 1st January, carried out an investigation into the question why we are not bringing this in, and told us what to do? Is the Commission, curiously, not coming until after June?
The Prime Minister
I always welcome, as the whole House does, visitors from the Continent, but I do not go out of my way to stimulate visits by the Commission on this or any other question. I recall a famous Guildhall speech in which we heard that as soon as a decision was taken to enter the European Economic Community investment would surge forward. It has not done so. It has fallen. It is this Government's policies which will revive investment in British industry.
Mr. Mike Thomas
Does my right hon. Friend agree that one of the reasons why investment may not have surged forward and companies are delaying investment is uncertainty about the matter, and that once the issue is settled the problem will be settled, too?
[column 702]The Prime Minister
The position, of course, is that there was what was regarded as certainty in 1971, and investment did not occur then. I agree that it is important that these matters should be settled as quickly as possible, and we are working to that end.
Mr. Hooley
If my right hon. Friend does pay a visit to the headquarters of OECD, will he inquire what percentage of their national wealth its different members are contributing to overseas aid, and report back to the House on how the United Kingdom stands in that league table?
The Prime Minister
I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I do not know the answer to that question but I shall try to advise myself on it without waiting to go to the OECD. In view of the announcements of Government expenditure and the statement of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Overseas Development, I would think that our record in this is very good compared with the record of many other members of OECD.
Mr. Spriggs
On a point of order. I applied to your Office, Mr. Speaker, for permission to raise a Private Notice Question——
Mr. Speaker
Order. It is a convention of the House that there cannot be discussion here about Private Notice Questions.