BRISTOL RESTRICTIONS 'ABSURD'
Page 51
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
THE Transport Holding Company can sell Bristol Commercial Vehicles Ltd. outright—but the firm's workers will not be allowed to buy shares in the annpany as it is. This firm statement came in the Commons last week from Mr. Thomas Galbraith, Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Transport, after hearing a complaint that the position of the 'firm was now "absolutely intolerable ".
Mr. Galbraith recalled that after some redundancy at the works the men asked to buy some shares so that the company would no longer be a wholly owned subsidiary of the Holding Company.
This would mean that it escaped from the manufacturing restrictions of the 1962 Transport Act, he said, and the company could then set out to expand its markets and during slack periods perhaps accept sub-contracting work from local engineering firms.
He pointed out that in both the 1947 and 1962 Acts the company was confined to the nationalized transport field, and in view of this a small sale of shares on the lines proposed would be merely a device to circumvent the intentions of Parliament.
The Minister would not consider it proper to give his consent to a sale for such a purpose, said Mr. Galbraith, even if the Holding Company sought his consent—which it had not. In the absence of a satisfactory offer to buy the warks outright it was the responsibility of the Holding Company to manage the securities entrusted to it by the Act to the best of its ability.
Mr. Galbraith gave an assurance that the company was always on the lookout for additional orders of the kind permitted by the Act. Indeed, the Holding Company believed that for the foreseeable future there would be enough work for approximately the present number of staff, about 678. He noted that production was now expected to stay at about 750 chassis a year.
Mr, Anthony Wedgwood Berm (Labour, Bristol South East) had earlier described the restrictions under which the company operated as "absurd, unfair rind economically nonsensical ". He appealed to the Minister to give it the green light it needed to develop in future, With the great need for general economic expansion it seemed to the workers there, and to him, absurd that this plant, because of ministerial decision, should not be used as it could he, went on Mr. Benn. The firm was now working well below capacity, facing redundancy, and with a very uncertain future because of Government policy.
Mr. Benn quoted Mr. Wilson as saying thin a Labour Government would remove the restrictions that now prevented nationalized industries from engaging in normal trade in the home and export markets, and encourage them to develop to the full.