British Shipping Industry

Part of the debate – in the House of Commons at 4:48 pm on 17 December 1984.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr Roger Stott Mr Roger Stott , Wigan 4:48, 17 December 1984

With respect to the hon. Gentleman, I do not know to which pamphlet he has referred. The NUS document does not mention the nationalisation of shipping companies. It certainly mentions a firmer degree of Government control, and I go along with that. Prior to the election the Labour party produced a document referring to a national shipping line. I do not think that the hon. Gentleman will find what he has suggested in the NUS document.

The hon. Gentleman is not a reluctant critic of the role of the Government. His report states: A long-term policy for British shipping is hard to detect. If there is an official view on the structure of the industry, on its tax regime, on its requirements for registration and regulation, it has yet to be made public as a coherent whole. That is absolutely right.

The report continues: A general view has been promulgated neither by Ministers nor officials on the structure of the industry. Again, the hon. Gentleman is spot on.

The report is critical of a lack of any real regulation over the conferences. It states: Despite a political belief"— that is the belief of the hon. Gentleman and his friend— that the conference system is ripe for reform … we have accepted the argument that any immediate dismantling of the system would quickly lead to disaster with the break up of much of the fleet and a consequent loss of influence worldwide. The pamphlet sets out certain suggestions in respect of the conference decisions. I subscribe to the recommendations, which are absolutely right.

The hon. Gentleman talked about cabotage and state aid and said that the Government should be prepared to go to the European court, if necessary, to ensure that other EEC countries do not breach the treaty of Rome on cabotage. The report makes a dramatic leap from having ended cabotage in Europe to pressing the United States Government to abandon cabotage and reversing Government-generated cargoes to United States flag ships. The demonstrates degree of naivety. The chances of getting Greece to abandon cabotage are extremely remote, especially now that it is the dominant shipping industry within the EEC. Italy is trying to obtain EEC approval for a package of credit measures that would encourage Italian shipowners to order new ships in Italian yards. The United States Government have categorically stated that they will not alter the principles of the Jones Act, which provides for United States cabotage.

The blind faith of the hon. Member for Romsey and Waterside in free trade leads him to confuse the ideal world of free trade and entrepreneurial endeavour, which he would like to see, with the real world of shipping. Cabotage exists and will continue to exist in the real world.