asked the Minister of Power what consideration is being given by Her Majesty's Government to the planning of pipelines and related equipment for the handling and distribution of North Sea gas.

asked the Minister of Power what consultations are being held with industry on the modifications of gas-using equipment which will be required for using North Sea gas.

I am giving very close attention to all the consequences of the discovery of gas in the North Sea. The scope and scale of these consequences will depend on the amounts discovered. The planning of pipelines and equipment for the handling, distribution and use of North Sea gas is in the first place for the gas industry and I am discussing it with them in the context of their capital development programmes.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the social needs of Norfolk and East Anglia in general for the industry which must flow as a result of these discoveries? Will he keep in close contact with the Regional Council?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Power what additional capital sums he proposes to allocate to the nationalised gas industry for piped distribution of North Sea gas during 1966-70; what compensating economy there will be on capital account in respect of imported liquid methane and associated underground storage, respectively; and whether he will make a statement.

May I first of all say how pleasant it is to see the hon. Gentleman's moustache again.

Until more is known about the availability of gas from the North Sea, it is not possible to estimate what investment will be required for its distribution. The only firm proposal at present is to construct a pipeline to transmit gas from the British Petroleum Company's wells from the coast to the existing methane grid at a cost of £5 million. No investment has been proposed in connection with additional imports of methane.

Does the right hon. Gentleman's reply mean that the capital allocation sums during the period between 1966 and 1970 for imported liquid methane will now remain unaltered?

The capital expenditure in regard to the importation of Algerian methane has been completed. It is not possible to make any capital predictions about North Sea gas in general until we have some idea of the quantities involved.

asked the Minister of Power when gas storage tanks will be available in the West Midlands area to house the gas shortly to be available from the North Sea project.

Storage tanks will not be required for this purpose.

asked the Minister of Power what is the estimated date for the supply of North Sea gas to Midlands industry.

asked the Minister of Power what is the earliest date on which gas from British Petroleum's North Sea concession is expected to be available to consumers; and what price per therm is to be paid by the Gas Council to British Petroleum.

The supply of 50 million cubic feet a day is planned to be available by about the middle of next year for use by the Midlands and other gas boards connected to the methane line. Smaller quantities may become available on shore before then. As the House was informed on 4th February, these supplies are being made available under an agreement for 15 years between the Gas Council and British Petroleum. The price of gas under this agreement will in general be for negotiation, but as a limited and temporary arrangement—and I should stress this—the price for an initial period of three years will be 5d. a therm for amounts up to an average of 100 million cubic feet a day.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that this price is rather exorbitant? Would he not further agree that British Petroleum would be able to recoup its investment within three years, and will he confirm that he will not allow Shell to strike that kind of financial bonanza?

This agreement was a limited and temporary arrangement suitable for the conditions at that particular time. It does not commit anybody to the same sort of agreement in the future.

By what percentage does the Minister think this will reduce the price to the domestic consumer in the Midlands?

It is impossible to give a figure till we have some idea of what there is in the North Sea, and this is a figure we have not yet got.

Are the supplies of North Sea gas expected to be of such a quantity as to require a revision of the figures in the fuel section of the National Plan?

Obviously, this whole question of North Sea gas will change our attitudes to many things. At present, however, no one knows the quantities which are available.

asked the Minister of Power when he expects the inquiry on the Sea Gem disaster to commence.

I cannot yet say, as preliminary investigations are not completed. I will see to it that there is no avoidable delay.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the urgency of this matter, the anxiety which arose over another break-up recently, and the number of other operations which are starting in the near future the construction of which must obviously be guided by the results of this inquiry?

I accept completely the importance of speed in this matter, but I think that hon. Members on both sides will agree that the fact that it should be a very comprehensive inquiry seems more important.

asked the Minister of Power what steps he has taken to implement the recommendation of the National Board for Prices and Incomes, in its Seventh Report, paragraph 84 (v), that the Government should require the gas and electricity industries to apply to new investment a minimum rate of return higher than the general target return expected from the whole of their capital employed.

I would refer the hon. Member to the statement made in the House on 10th March in reply to my hon. Friend the Member for Normanton (Mr. Albert Roberts).

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that that did not take us very far? Does he not recognise that unless an adequate rate of return is demanded from these projects—and this is a matter essentially for the Government—it is bound to lead to an increase in prices? This was the burden of the Prices and Incomes Board Report on this aspect.

The nationalised industries already operate on the lines of the Board's recommendation.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order for right hon. and hon. Gentlemen to answer Questions by referring to answers which were given in this House in the last Parliament?

Yes, but the hon. Gentleman should raise a point of order about Questions at the end of Question Time.

Later—

On a point of order. You were kind enough to say, Mr. Speaker, that you would reply at the end of Questions to a point of order I raised during Questions. The point of order was whether it was in order for Ministers, in replying to questions of my hon. Friends, to make reference to replies made in previous Parliaments.

I replied very briefly to the hon. Gentleman. I told him that it was in order. I went on to say that I hoped that points of order would not be raised unnecessarily at Question Time. A Minister is in order in referring to questions or answers made in a previous Session.

asked the Minister of Power if he will seek power to enable him to insert in the licences which he grants to drill for oil or gas in the North Sea a provision that the relevant shore offices and berthings of apparatus be located in places in Scotland nominated by him.

No, Sir. The location of shore installations must plainly have regard to the area of operations.

Does the Minister not realise that it is completely wrong and anti-British to allow the beneficiaries of these licences to divert their wealth away from Scotland, which depends so much on the North Sea?

I am sure my hon. and learned Friend will agree that the most important consideration is to see that the Scottish consumer gets natural gas at the cheapest possible price. This is not helped by unnecessarily expensive distribution systems.

Would my hon. Friend remember that if he is to have a successful distribution of gas in Scotland he must have the utmost co-operation from local authorities in connection with wayleaves?

asked the Minister of Power if he is aware that effluvia from drillings for oil and gas in the North Sea under licence drive fish shoals away from the fishing grounds there and are sufficient to imperil the fish and the fishing grounds; and if he will take steps, by legislation or otherwise. to obviate that peril.

No, Sir. I have no evidence to suggest that drilling for oil and gas has any adverse effect on fish.

Would my hon. Friend say what scientific inquiries he has made on which to base that answer? Does he realise that fish are very sensitive creatures and can be driven away by oil and gas from their customary haunts?

A full investigation was carried out by the California Department of Fish and Game between 1958 and 1960 and it found that there was no deleterious effect on fish. The implication of my hon. and learned Friend's Question seems to be that oil is bad for English fish but might be good for Scottish fish.

asked the Minister of Power to what extent the price of gas provided to domestic consumers by the Scottish Gas Board differs from the average price charged by other boards; and by what percentage the Scottish charges to domestic consumers exceed the lowest figure charged by another board.

The average revenue per therm from domestic sales in Scotland in 1964-65, the latest year for which figures are available, was 29·70d. This compared with figures ranging from 22·59d. to 31·96d. per therm in other areas, and a national average of 26·36d. a therm. Since then there have been tariff changes in Scotland and some other areas, and it is not possible to provide up-to-date comparisons.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that there has just been a 13 per cent. increase in the Scottish prices? Is he suggesting that these price increases were approved and applied before he made comparisons between Scotland and other areas? Has not the differential now become so serious that consideration should be given to making an equal charge in different parts of the country? Does the Minister say that he has not got the figures applying to the 13 per cent?

The rationalisation of tariffs is an entirely different subject, and a big subject. As to the figures at the latest date available, I have given them to the hon. Gentleman. They are in the Answer. As to the 13 per cent. increase in prices, one cannot give an answer until one has been able to establish to what extent the price change alters the pattern of consumption.

asked the Minister of Power whether the proposed terms of compensation for the acquisition of steel shares, set out in the White Paper of April 1965, still represent Government policy.

I cannot anticipate the publication of the Bill.

Would it not be in the public interest to end the uncertainty which many thousands of investors are in about the value of their shareholdings, which has turned this most vital of our industries into a speculator's paradise?

It is important to end all the uncertainty hovering over this industry, and the Government will do so in this Session. The particular issue raised by the hon. Gentleman is one which, obviously, will be covered by part of the Bill, and it must await publication of the Bill.

While accepting the method of assessing compensation set out in the White Paper, will my right hon. Friend consider the possibility of bringing the five-year period up to date to read 1961-66, and will he take note of the implications of such a change?

In the situation now, we have to take notice of the changed circumstances, if such exist, since the last debate we had in the House. Obviously, one of the things which will be considered, among many others, is the whole pattern of the terms of compensation, together with the rest of the Bill, though within the context, presumably, of the White Paper.

May I take this first opportunity to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on attaining his high office? Does he agree with the White Paper which described the compensation terms there set out as the fairest basis of valuation?

The terms of the White Paper were accepted at that time, and have been accepted since, as the Government's attitude to this issue. A period of time has elapsed since, and, if for no reason other than that I come fresh to this office, one is re-examining the Bill within the context of the White Paper.

I congratulate my right hon. Friend on the attainment of his office and on the consideration he is giving to this subject. Will he consider, also, the proposition that it might be a good idea, as happened in the case of many other previous nationalisation Measures, if the compensation was not fixed at the beginning but was fixed after discussion about it in the House of Commons?

Without wishing to be too repetitive, I think my hon. Friend will agree that we must all await publication of the Bill.

When will the Bill be published?

If the hon. Gentleman cares to put down a Question, I shall willingly answer.

asked the Minister of Power when he proposes to introduce a Bill for the public ownership of the steel industry.

asked the Minister of Power when he expects to introduce a Bill to restore public ownership and control of the main part of the steel industry.

I would refer by hon. Friends to the statement made by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 21st April.

Before introducing the Bill, will my right hon. Friend give a firm commitment to look once again into the question of the compensation, which many of us on this side feel to be over-generous, and will he give an undertaking also to look into the question of a real injection of industrial democracy into the reorganisation of the industry?

Yes, Sir.

Can my right hon. Friend assure us that, when the Bill is introduced, it will cover all the assets of the firm of Stewarts and Lloyds in Corby, Northamptonshire?

Again, it is not possible to anticipate the Bill. I would be rather surprised if the particular firm was not included in the proposals.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider, in the national interest, deferring the introduction of the Bill, which can only hinder our economic recovery and bring gloom to our overseas creditors?

asked the Minister of Power if he is aware that gas consumers are required to pay twice for gas consumed when a prepayment meter has been robbed; and if he will prepare legislation to relieve consumers of this obligation.

The present situation is of long standing. Area gas boards consider the circumstances in each case, sometimes in consultation with the police, and I am not satisfied that a change in the law is justified.

Could the hon. Gentleman suggest to gas boards that they might include in the standing charge a very small sum which would constitute universal insurance against this for all users so that people who have their meters robbed are not suddenly saddled with an enormous extra bill?

This is a matter for the area boards, but it is a difficult one. Each year about 100,000 meters are broken open, involving losses of about £350,000. One would not want to encourage people to regard their gas meters as a sort of "piggy bank".

May I, on behalf of my right hon. and hon. Friends, take this opportunity to congratulate the hon. Gentleman on his appointment? As the consumer is penalised in this way, through no fault of his own, will the hon. Gentleman look again into this whole question of meters which are robbed?

As I have said, I think that a useful purpose is served if the matter is raised with area consultative committees. I know that in the case of the Northern Gas Board, for example, a satisfactory arrangement was reached.

asked the Minister of Power whether, in order to maintain the prosperity of the Scottish economy, he will give a direction to the Gas Council to extend the methane gas pipeline to Scotland.

My right hon. Friend is very anxious to ensure that Scotland gains full benefit from discoveries of gas in the North Sea. It is too early to say whether this can most economically be secured by extending the methane pipeline or by other means.

When do the experts hope to be able to give a verdict on this?

Plainly, not before we know how much gas there is and where it is.

asked the Minister of Power what consultations took place between the Chairman of the National Coal Board and himself concerning the coal price increases recently announced, having regard to their discriminatory effect.

asked the Minister of Power what consultations he had with the Chairman of the National Coal Board before the recent price increases of coal in Scotland.

Both the Government and the Board believe it is desirable to secure a better correlation between the prices and costs of the various coalfields and the various coals, and this policy was supported by the National Board for Prices and Incomes in its recent Report on coal prices. My predecessor was in close touch with the Chairman of the National Coal Board when the price increases were under consideration.

What influence will this substantial price increase have on the cost of living index measured during the next six months?

I would require notice to answer that question.

Does my right hon. Friend think that this discriminatory price increase in so far as it relates to Scotland will have the effect of expediting pit closures still further? If that is the case, what remedial steps are the Government taking by introducing and encouraging an influx of new industry into the areas?

The first thing to bear in mind as to this policy is that the one thing which would damage the coal mining industry in general, not to say British industry as well, would be a situation where low-cost highly efficient coalfields were forced to average up to meet the costs incurred by perhaps less efficient coalfields. I do not think that this price increase will have a detrimental effect on the Scottish economy. Indeed, the Government would not support it if they thought it would.

Is the Minister aware that this increase in prices will make it much more difficult to attract coal-consuming industries to Scotland?

The estimated additional total industrial cost should be under half of 1 per cent. Given the rest of the Government's policies, I do not think this will have a bad effect on the Scottish economy.

Is not this another example of the failure of nationalised industry—worse quality and worse service at increased cost?

The hon. and gallant Gentleman is consistent in his inability to understand the point. This has nothing to do with the efficiency or inefficiency of nationalised industry.

asked the Minister of Power to what extent the pithead price of coal provided to domestic consumers by the Scottish Coal Board will differ from the average price charged in other areas when the price is raised on 1st May; and by what percentage the Scottish price exceeds the lowest figure for a comparable grade of coal supplied in other areas of Great Britain.

The National Coal Board sell domestic coal not at pithead prices but at zone delivered prices, which include cost of transport from pithead to station depots. There are 60 zones, with different prices, in Great Britain. Domestic coal is grouped according to qualities, and there are five groups in England and Wales and seven in Scotland. In view of these complications, I have asked the Chairman of the National Coal Board to send the hon. Member a copy of the list of the prices which will come into effect on 1st May.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not appreciate that I raised this question in the last Parliament and that the same answer was given? Is he seriously saying that the Prices and Incomes Board and the Ministry approved these staggering increases in Scotland without knowing what were the prices involved?

The hon. Gentleman first of all asks to what extent the pithead price of coal provided to domestic consumers by the Scottish Coal Boad will differ from the average price in other areas. Domestic coal is not sold at pithead prices. It is sold at zone delivered prices. In any case, when one takes the zone delivered prices the complications are such that if the hon. Gentleman gets the figures together—and they will be sent to him by the Chairman of the National Coal Board—he will be able to work them out for himself.

asked the Minister of Power what steps the Government have taken, pursuant to recommendation 69 (v) of the Twelfth Report of the National Coal Board for Prices and Incomes, to assume greater responsibility for identifying and critically examining the assumptions on which the forecast of yield on new investment by the National Coal Board in diversification projects is based.

This is a matter which I have under consideration and intend to discuss with the National Coal Board.

Will the right hon. Gentleman go ahead with this? Does he not realise that it is essential that there should be an accurate appraisal of investment projects, and could not the nationalised industries be giving a lead in such technique as the use of discounted cash flow and similar matters?

I can only say that we are discussing this with the National Coal Board. We regard this as an important issue and are getting ahead with it as fast as we can. We have only got through the first two weeks so far.

asked the Minister of Power what steps are being taken to see that adequate supplies of domestic coal are available to merchants in South-West Scotland.

With the advance of mechanisation the proportion of large coal has fallen. There are, however, plentiful supplies of "doubles", and these are now being accepted by merchants.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that some merchants are receiving only about one-third of their requirements and that this not only affects the domestic consumer but must also reduce sales at the pithead?

The position is that owing to the cold weather there has been a heavy demand for large coal, but there are plentiful supplies of the smaller graded coal known as "doubles", and these are now being accepted by merchants.

asked the Minister of Technology if he has received a report on the cyclical pattern of machine tool ordering from the Working Party appointed to study that subject; and if he will make a statement.

I have nothing to add to what I said in the House on this subject yesterday.

How soon after publication of the report does the Minister hope to make a statement, and, in view of the financial implications which could be therein contained, will he make such a statement before publication of the Finance Bill?

I said yesterday that I would publish the report of the Working Party as soon as possible. I intend to do so, and I do not think that the other implications arise.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will remove or reduce the Purchase Tax on musical instruments where these are used exclusively by schools and purchased through the appropriate education authorities.

No, Sir. It is not practicable to make special concessions to particular users of taxable articles.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that the total amount of revenue collected in tax on all musical instruments is only £1 million in a single year? Although this would be a small concession, it would be a valuable contribution to the musical education of children in our schools. Will my hon. and learned Friend look into it again?

I am aware of the fact to which my hon. Friend draws attention, and I think that I answered his Question about it in a Written Answer yesterday. The difficulty here is that one cannot consider one exemption which is proposed in isolation from the very many other requests which we receive to similar effect. There are, for example, many other articles used by local authorities which are subject to tax, including many used by schools, such as stationery and sports equipment.

Why are pianos free of Purchase Tax and all other musical instruments taxed?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman, with his vast experience in this subject, will know the answer.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it in order for the Minister to question me? Surely, his duty is to answer me.

Order. Nothing out of order has happened, and to raise points of order in Question Time uses up valuable time.

As we have created a Ministry to promote the arts, and music is an art, why should we tax them?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why no licence is required for a hound bred for hunting until it is 12 months old.

The reason given to the House in 1878 was that it would be difficult to tell in under twelve months whether the animal would be a useful member of the pack.

As something may have happened since 1878, I think that we might get round to changing that Measure. Would not my hon. and learned Friend agree that an element of social injustice is involved here, when the mongrel pup of an old-age pensioner is liable for a licence at six months but a hound bred for hunting—the unspeakable chasing the uneatable—can get away without the licence? Will he look into the matter again?

My hon. Friend should not mince his words. He will be interested to know that in 1878 this Measure was opposed as a gross piece of class legislation. All I can say in answer to his further question is that I cannot give any undertaking that my right hon. Friend will put this matter high in his list of priorities for tax reform.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in order to halt the growth in the monopoly control of the Press, by certain newspaper groups, he will encourage the survival of smaller circulation papers, such as the Sunday Citizen, by asking Departments to give an increased share of their advertising to such publications.

Advertising for Departments is placed with newspapers so as to achieve the required results in the most economical way, and by no other test.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that out of £5¼ million on Government Press advertising last year, only £2,530 went to the Sunday Citizen and precisely £30 to Tribune? In view of the widespread concern on both sides of the House about shrinking Press freedom, does he think that this is adequate or even proportionate support for the remaining independent newspapers?

I shall be glad to give my hon. Friend further information about proportionate advertising. However, I assure the House that I think that we should get ourselves into real difficulties if we started to place advertising on any principle other than that of seeking to achieve the object at which the advertising is directed.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will introduce legislation to end the anomaly under which public schools owned by corporate bodies and registered as charities are entitled to a 50 per cent. reduction in rates.

No, Sir. I have some sympathy with the suggestion, but I feel that attempts to separate one sort of charity from others might lead to great difficulties.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his attitude is contrary to that which was adopted by my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary when the Rating and Valuation Act was before the House in 1961? Is he further aware that when the hard-pressed ratepayers in my constituency think of a charity their thoughts do not automatically fly to Harrow School?

Yes, Sir; I am aware of this. I must admit that when I looked at the Oxford and Cambridge colleges I came to a different conclusion, but there were so many of them in the middle of such small cities, and public schools are so peppered over the community, that I think we should leave them as they are.

Instead of giving sympathy to proposals for further increases in rates, will the right hon. Gentleman say when the Government propose to introduce legislation to reduce the total burden of rates, which has risen by an unprecedented amount under the Labour Government?

I should like to congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on his return to the House and to the Opposition Front Bench, and on the tone of his first question addressed to me. The answer is: yes, we shall have our second major rating Measure before the House before an undue delay has occurred.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will introduce legislation to amend Section 3 of the London Government Act, 1963, in order to re-establish Middlesex as a geographical county with boundaries as they existed before the creation of the Greater London Council, so as to keep the identity of the county as a part of the United Kingdom, as the area serving such organisations as the Middlesex Regiment and the Middlesex Cricket Club.

No, Sir. The London Government Act, 1963, and the Administration of Justice Act, 1964, make provision in Greater London for all the purposes for which elsewhere counties are statutorily established. The objects the hon. Member has in view do not require the statutory designation of Middlesex as a county.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept from me that there is a good deal of local feeling that Middlesex in some way should be retained as a geographical county, and when the next opportunity occurs of a Greater London Bill perhaps he will bear this in mind sympathetically and see whether geographical status can be given to the area?

I am always looking back to see the virtues in the Bills of my predecessors, and I find that in a Bill of the previous Administration one of the five areas in Greater London for which a Commission of the Peace was established is still named the Middlesex area, and with that, I am sure, the hon. Gentleman should be content.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he will now give a decision on the Manchester Draft Water Order.

I hope to announce my decision soon.

While I welcome that reply, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that there is considerable anxiety in the North-West over the delay in reaching this decision? The Manchester scheme is held up every day that the reply is held up. Will he also say what consideration is being given to the long-term water needs of the whole of the north-west area?

I very much appreciate what Manchester representatives are feeling about this. I would tell my hon. Friend, as I said in answer to a Question before the General Election, that this is one of the most difficult issues that we have had in which amenity really has to be considered very carefully in supplying water to Manchester. As for the long-term needs, these are indeed being taken into account already.

When the right hon. Gentleman gives his answer, will it apply to the long term as well as the short term? Can we have it all in one go without further bites at the cherry?

No, Sir; that would be impossible. What I am dealing with is a Draft Order. We have to approve or disapprove the Order without Amendment, and the Order can deal only with the medium term. It will be made clear that the long-term provision has to be dealt with separately.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that to speak of "Manchester" here is very misleading? The Order has reference to about 31 authorities in the North-West leading up to the Lake District. Although the importance of Manchester is well understood, it is far more important for all the other authorities which will have powers arising out of the Order.

My hon. Friend is quite right. What we call "the Manchester water need" is a need for a far greater area than Manchester, and I do not underestimate the urgency of the question.

asked the Minister of Transport if she will seek power to ensure that the chassis of vehicles which have been written-off are not used in the construction or repair of any vehicle which will be put on sale to the public.

I do not think that my hon. Friend's proposal solves the problem associated with insurance "write-offs". Because a vehicle is an insurance "write-off" it does not always follow that its chassis is beyond repair. Section 68 of the Road Traffic Act, 1960, already prohibits the sale of a vehicle if it is in an unroadworthy condition.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many of the vehicles that are being sold are botched up jobs from total wrecks which have been written off by insurance companies and that they are a menace to road users? It is not only a matter of consumer protection; these are a menace to all users of the roads. Is my hon. Friend aware that some legislation is necessary to prevent such vehicles from being used on high-speed motorways?

I would make it clear to my hon. Friend and the House that it is already an offence to sell a vehicle if it is in an unroadworthy condition, and if, therefore, what he says is true, offences are being committed and should be reported. We have made proposals to the insurance companies, which I cannot at the moment reveal, in order to tighten up the procedure for handling written-off vehicles.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that this is a very real problem and that even in the West Country it is developing into a racket? Ought there not to be some form of registration of chassis and engine numbers at county halls so that licences are not given to such built-up cars in future?

If the hon. Gentleman will report instances of this sort to us, we will deal with the matter, because it is clearly an offence now under the road traffic legislation to sell a vehicle in an unroadworthy condition.

While my hon. Friend is looking into it, will he also look at the problem of garages charging exorbitant rates for repairing vehicles which do not require any repair at all?

That is another question.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that this is a real scandal, widely acknowledged in the industry, which might be a suitable candidate for inclusion in the Road Safety Bill when it returns?

As I have said, we have put proposals to the insurance companies and are discussing procedure for catching written-off vehicles. It may be, as a result of our discussions, that we shall put forward proposals for legislation.

asked the Minister of Land and Natural Resources whether legislation will be introduced this year to amend the National Parks Act, so as to make better provision for the protection and enjoyment of the countryside of England and Wales.

I regret that it has not been found possible to include this measure in the legislative programme for this Session.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a good deal of disappointment about the delay over many years by successive Governments in introducing legislation on a subject about which there is wide general public agreement? We have had legislation for Scotland. Why not for England and Wales?

The position of Scotland is different. The National Parks Act does not apply there. My hon. Friend's disappointment is shared by the Government, but if he studies the Gracious Speech he will realise that it was not possible to include such legislation in the programme for this Session.

Will time be found for the abolition of the right hon. Gentleman's Department? Does not he now consider that its establishment was a mistake?