asked the Secretary of State for War whether he can disclose the circumstances of the death, in Malaya on 21st March, 1952, of Private MacDonald; and why he has declined to allow the father of the deceased soldier to see the report of the inquiry.

On 21st March last year Lance-Corporal MacDonald was travelling in an armoured car on convoy duty in Malaya. The armoured car was forced to the verge of a narrow road to avoid an approaching civilian vehicle, the bank of the ditch at the roadside collapsed under its weight and the car overturned. This soldier most regrettably sustained severe head injuries from which he died.

The reports of courts of inquiry are confidential and privileged documents and we do not disclose them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the father of this soldier, who himself has an excellent military record in the First World War, is distressed both at the death of his son and at the failure of the War Office to furnish him with particulars about the affair? If the report is confidential and cannot be disclosed to the father, will the right hon. Gentleman ask the father to come and see him in order that the right hon. Gentleman may talk to him about the situation and thus endeavour to remove some of his distress?

Yes. I well appreciate the father's distress. I have seen the letters which were sent explaining how the accident occurred, but if I can do anything more to relieve his feelings I shall be only too glad to do it.

Do I understand from the right hon. Gentleman's reply that he will invite Mr. MacDonald to see him in order to talk it over?

Yes, Sir. If Mr. MacDonald wishes to come to see me, I will certainly invite him.

asked the Secretary of State for War (1) how many Army personnel are on the waiting list for married accommodation in Home Commands including the British Army of the Rhine;

(2) how many Army personnel of all ranks are on the waiting list for married accommodation in Honk Kong, Malaya. Middle East, West and East Africa. Gibraltar and Malta, respectively.

Waiting lists are kept up-to-date locally. A special return would not, I think, be worth while, since such figures would not fully show the demand because many men put their names on the list only when they are likely soon to qualify. My hon. Friend will, however, be dealing in detail with the married quarter situation at home and overseas during the debate on the Army Estimates.

When this subject is dealt with in the forthcoming debate, will my right hon. Friend ensure that figures, as nearly accurate as possible, are given in this connection, because this is a matter which is causing great hardship and creating very great concern in all quarters concerned with Army welfare?

Yes, Sir. I am only too well aware of the problem of affording accommodation to married soldiers. My hon. Friend will put the general problem before the House.

asked the Secretary of State for War why Private Arthur Stanley Garrington of the Territorial Army was sentenced to 28 days' detention on Saturday, 21st February, although his alleged offence was committed in July last year, since when he has regularly attended parades; and whether, in view of the long delay, he will arrange for his immediate release from Lichfield Barracks where he is now undergoing detention.

This was a grave offence and disciplinary action was fully justified. However, since there was a serious and abnormal delay in dealing with the case, I have given orders for this man's release.

Is the Secretary of State aware that his act of clemency and common sense will be commended not only by the soldier undergoing detention but by all those who have had any connection with the case?

asked the Secretary of State for War why the claims department of the War Office fails to reply to communications with regard to the claim of Mr. R. S. Symonds of Norwich in respect of damage to his car caused by a War Department vehicle on 21st December last.

My Department has been in constant communication since 31st December last year with Mr. Symonds, his insurance company and his solicitors.

Is the Minister aware that, while acknowledgments may have been passing, no decision has been reached in 2½ months? Is he aware that many men of modest means suffer great additional hardship because of delays of this nature in settling claims?

We are corresponding with three different agents in this case. I have noticed that 11 letters passed last month. One of the problems is to establish liaison between the three different people representing Mr. Symonds.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has given consideration to the much lower capital cost of troop transport by air as compared with sea travel; and, in view of the undoubted advantage of saving in time and manpower, what steps he is taking to put the Army on a more mobile basis.

Individual trooping is now being carried out by air everywhere except for North-West Europe and the Far East. For various reasons it is uneconomic for North-West Europe, but we aim at an extension of air trooping to the Far East.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his reply as far as it goes, would he bear this matter in mind for his Army Estimates, because obviously it is vital so far as the mobility of the Army is concerned?

I agree with the right hon. Gentleman.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether, so far as his experience enables him to say, the use of air instead of sea transport has enabled him to use manpower to greater advantage?

That is true where reinforcements are concerned, but it will be a long time before unit moves can take place by air since they have to move with their unit transport. Where reinforcements are concerned, there is no doubt that air transport conserves manpower considerably.

Arising out of that last reply, is the right hon. Gentleman making any experiments whatever on a unit basis, bearing in mind the way that parachute troops move with their transport through the air?

Yes, Sir. Of course parachute troops are organised with the minimum of transport, and their ability to maintain themselves over a long period is strictly limited, whereas an infantry battalion has sufficient transport to maintain itself for an indefinite period.

In considering this, will the Minister look a little further than the manpower and capital expenditure involved, and look, too, at the strategic implications of moving troops by air, in view particularly of the results of the Monte Bello experiment, which showed fairly clearly the extreme vulnerability of sea lines of communication and harbour installations?

Yes. I believe the establishment of a strategic reserve held in this country, which could be rapidly transported by air, is the objective at which we must always aim.

asked the Secretary of State for War the number of services in each direction across the North Atlantic made by the York trooping aircraft since 2nd July, 1952, when the Skyways contract began; and what is the total number of passengers carried in each direction.

Nineteen outward flights carrying 616 passengers, and 19 flights to this country carrying 607 passengers.

As the total number is apparently 38, can the right hon. Gentleman say why, when last week we were questioning him about this route and this aircraft, he said that more than 112 flights had been made across the Atlantic?

If the hon. Gentleman will read his Question, he will see that he asked me about Skyways trooping of York aircraft. The Question last week was concerned with Atlantic crossings by York aircraft, which remain at the figure of 112. I can add this information, which I was unable to give last week, that 73 of those 112 flights were made in winter.

But is the Minister now saying that any firm other than Skyways has made a single crossing of the North Atlantic?

Yes, Sir.

With York aircraft?

Yes.

asked the Secretary of State for War if he will give youths, who join the Forces voluntarily with the consent of their parents, an opportunity of resigning if they desire to do so at the end of each triennial period.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a young man is more mature at the age of 20 to come to a decision of this character than he is at the age of 15 or 16 years? If he changes his mind after joining at the age of 15 or 16, will the Minister give him an opportunity to retire from the Forces when he is at a mature age and can come to a proper decision?

Yes, we have reconsidered this matter since I introduced the Estimates last year, and for regimental boys the period has been reduced from eight to six years.

Is there not some misunderstanding? Is it not the case that those who volunteer for the long-service engagements can resign at the end of the triennial period?

No, there is no misunderstanding.

asked the Secretary of State for War what action he has taken to prune the non-essential administrative units of the Army; how far this action has increased the fighting strength of the Army; what action he has taken to make good the deficiency of young Regular officers, senior non-commissioned officers and technicians, and the gradual decline in the number of long-Service Regulars.

I intend to deal fully with these three important questions when I introduce the Army Estimates. I would ask the hon. Member to await that occasion.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he has added up the vast number of civilians attached to the Army, shown in the Army Estimates published recently?

Wherever possible we have made attempts in administration and base depots to substitute civilians for soldiers because much of this work is unsuitable for soldiers, particularly for National Service men called up, and I believe it to be a sound policy.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that certain regiments of the Royal Armoured Corps have been ordered to include four troopers in their Coronation parties, the total of which is only seven other ranks; and whether, since such detailed interference with the duties of commanding officers is contrary to previously accepted principles of command, he will cause the instructions to be altered.

The representation is one officer, one warrant officer, one sergeant, one corporal and four lance-corporals or troopers. This is designed to ensure a fair and proportional representation of all ranks in the Army.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the only preoccupation of commanding officers in this respect is that their parties should be adequately representative of the regiments, that not unnaturally they wish to include those N.C.O.s and others who have given long service, both in war and peace, to Her Majesty's late father, and that this inclusion of a predominant proportion of people who have only just joined is quite unnecessary and should not be done?

I do not think we can accept that the four lance-corporals or troopers have only just joined. Possibly all units have some old soldiers whom they would like to have as representatives. I would suggest to my hon. and gallant Friend that on the whole, much though I admire sergeants and warrant officers, we should have a representation which represents the general proportion of ranks in the Army.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether this applies also to the other branches of the Service and if so, does he not agree that the commanding officer is the best judge of who is best able to represent the regiment?

Is this not a needless and unwarrantable interference with the prerogative of a commanding officer? If he deems it desirable to send six sergeant-majors, why should not he be allowed to do so?

While accepting the preoccupation of the hon. Gentleman with sergeant-majors, I would point out that on the occasion of the last Coronation there was a certain amount of uncertainty as to the type of representation which there should be, and it varied. Some units sent nothing but warrant officers and sergeants and others adopted a different policy. By and large I do not believe it to be a bad thing to lay down general principles.

asked the Secretary of State for War by what number of officers and of other ranks respectively, the staff of the War Office has been reduced during the past 12 months.

The military staff was reduced in the year ended 31st January, 1953, by 102 officers and 47 other ranks.

In view of my previous Question, may I ask that it shall be further reduced so as to avoid this unnecessary meddling with things that do not concern it?

asked the Secretary of State for War to publish the official report of the Quartermaster-General concerning the shortage of up-to-date newspapers for British troops in Korea.

The Quartermaster-General made no official report on this matter when he returned from Korea.

Would the right hon. Gentleman clear up this point, because both sides of the House are interested? Is it correct that when the Quartermaster-General returned he said, and I quote from the "Observer":

"the most welcome present that can be sent to anyone serving in Korea is his … newspaper by air mail."?

Does the right hon. Gentleman's reply mean that he is now satisfied that the men in Korea have an adequate supply of up-to-date newspapers?

The answer to the first part of the supplementary question is that the hon. Lady is perfectly correct. No official report was made, but the Quartermaster-General stated that at the Press conference which he held. As a result, the mailing of papers to Korea has increased by 20 per cent. I am not entirely satisfied that the men in Korea have all the newspapers they want but, as I explained to the hon. Lady, if I were to subsidise the newspapers sent to Korea, it would be an immense expense. Indeed it costs £1,500 a ton by air, and newspapers, unfortunately, are very heavy matter for air freight.

Send them the "Daily Worker."

Arising out of that reply, may I ask the Minister if, in view of what he said last week, he would be willing to discuss this problem with the newspapers to see if together they could arrive at a solution?

Yes, I can assure the hon. Lady of that. Indeed the "Yorkshire Post" and the "Staffordshire News Letter" are already sending out by air a number of their papers which they themselves pay for.

Can the Minister define exactly what he means by the words "up-to-date newspapers"? Is he aware that the Scottish troops in Korea get on a Sunday 145 "Sunday Posts" and nothing else? Would he define the "Sunday Post" as an up-to-date newspaper, since it is at least 100 years out of date?

I can tell the hon. Gentleman that it is left entirely to the battalions concerned to decide what newspapers they want, and I understand that all ranks are consulted in this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many Army personnel were engaged in flood relief work; and what action is being taken to show in a practical way the nation's appreciation of the work they performed under trying conditions.

At the peak more than 11,000 men were directly employed on flood relief work. Damaged clothing and equipment are being replaced without charge and as far as possible loss of leave caused by these duties is being made good. Individuals who have rendered specially meritorious service will be considered for recommendation for the appropriate awards.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Services, including the Army in particular, do not look for public recognition for doing their job, which they are very pleased to do on behalf of the country?

The hon. and gallant Member should ask some of them, and they would give him the right answer.

asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will make a statement about the marriage and separation allowances of officers serving in the Middle and Far East, a review of which he announced on 22nd July last.

Not yet, Sir.

As my right hon. Friend said on 22nd July last that he recognised that there were anomalies in connection with these allowances, is it possible for him to say when he expects to be able to make a statement about his review?

I would ask my hon. Friend to wait and see.

asked the Secretary of State for War how many Army deserters have taken advantage of the amnesty.

Up to last week-end, 432 men had reported.

Is not this a disappointing response and well below expectations? When are we to have a simple and clear statement tying up all the loose ends in the Prime Minister's statement, a statement which should be available to the general public, who do not always read HANSARD?

It is hard to estimate how many of these men are at present in this country, but our estimate is about 2,800. They have been coming in steadily, and I think that the figure of 432 will be considerably exceeded. Of course, there are undoubtedly men who have been living under different names and who do not wish to change them, because of the dislocation to their ordinary day-to-day life which would occur.

Is it not a fact that many of these men may be abroad? Have steps been taken to publicise the decision about the amnesty?

Yes, Sir. I think that the decision has been in the majority of foreign newspapers. We reckon that out of the total unaccounted for, which is some 10,000, quite a large proportion are in Ireland, and I do not think that one would expect them to report.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the number of letters of appreciation that have been received by, I should imagine, every Member of the House—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Then they do not write to Socialist Members—shows the appreciation which all these unhappy men feel towards Her Majesty's Government for this kind and generous action?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what duties and restrictive quotas are applied to British cotton piece goods entering India; and what duties and restrictive quotas are applied to Indian cotton piece goods entering the United Kingdom.

The Indian Finance Minister announced changes in import duties to be imposed on all cotton piece goods in his Budget last Friday. I would prefer to await further detailed information by air mail before making a statement to the House. Import licences are not being issued at present for cotton piece goods other than sateens, velvets and velveteens.

Cotton piece goods manufactured in, and consigned from, India are duty free in the United Kingdom, and virtually all cotton piece goods entering the United Kingdom from India are unrestricted.

It is not clear that this arrangement between India and this country is entirely unsatisfactory so far as we are concerned? Can my hon. Friend say what steps the Government are taking to bring about a more equitable state of affairs?

As I have told my hon. Friend, my right hon. Friend must see the details of this Budget statement before we comment. So far we have seen only the telegrams.

Would not the Secretary for Overseas Trade agree that the present agreement with India is a good one and highly beneficial to this country, and that we should be very careful about what we are doing?

Certainly, we should be careful about commenting on this matter without seeing the full text.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total surpluses earned by the Export Credit Guarantees Department since its inception.

The total is £14,399,519. Deficiencies of £3,042,445 were incurred and the net contribution to the Exchequer was £11,357,074. This surplus relates to commercial guarantees only.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to help the export of hand-made woollen products from the Highlands.

I am very ready to consider any practicable suggestions from the industry on ways in which the Board of Trade can help it in its efforts to increase its overseas sales. The Board's regional representatives in Scotland ensure that firms are informed of the ordinary help to exporters which the Department offers, and details of particular openings for trade, as reported from time to time by overseas posts, are brought to the notice of exporters who are likely to be interested.

While I welcome what is done by the Department at present, would the Minister agree that, although it is very important to help these areas where unemployment is high, it is a rather difficult matter to do it in the case of so many small firms? Will the hon. Gentleman say whether help can be given with finance and also in bringing these goods to the notice of Coronation visitors?

I am only too anxious to do anything I can to help the hon. Member. We are arranging, as soon as the better weather arrives, for one of our regional officers to get round to these remote places, particularly those to which the hon. Member has referred in his discussions with me.

Is not my hon. Friend a little surprised that the chief exponent of laisser faire wants the Government to sell his constituents' goods?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the nature of the contract, worth £10 million, which this country recently lost to Germany for goods to be supplied to a Latin-American State, in which this country's margin of profit was less than the Germans although our cost of production was higher.

I know of no such contract.

I do not want to comment on that any further. I wish now, Mr. Speaker, to raise a point of order. This Question arose from a completely erroneous statement made by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health during the Canterbury by-election. When I approached the Table to try to put a Question to the Prime Minister to find out whether erroneous statements of this sort represented the policy of the Government, I could not get it past the Table; and I am informed that Parliamentary Secretaries are not deemed to be responsible persons in relation to Governmental or Cabinet responsibility.

Events of this sort, fortunately, are rare, but I should be obliged, Mr. Speaker, if you would give me and the House your guidance, in case of the repetition of an incident such as this, as to what course is open to an hon. Member when a Parliamentary Secretary or Minister below the rank of Cabinet Minister makes statements in the country for which he cannot be held accountable to the House.

The rule is perfectly clear. Questions can be addressed to Ministers only with regard to those matters for which they are administratively responsible to the House. That applies also as regards Parliamentary Secretaries, but Questions cannot as a rule be addressed to Parliamentary Secretaries unless they have been specifically nominated to take charge of certain departments of the Administration. The hon. Member asks my advice. I can only say that these matters can be raised in debate and by counter-speeches, and so on, but Questions cannot be used for that purpose.

I understand that this particular incident was settled by an apology and withdrawal, which was accepted by the Opposition, and I think that if that is the case it should not be raised again.

I hope that you are not blaming me, Mr. Speaker, for raising a general point of order, bearing in mind that in my first sentence I said that I accepted the apology. Are there not precedents? Is it not a fact that when my hon. Friend the Member for Wednesbury (Mr. S. N. Evans) made a speech that resulted in his leaving the Ministry of Food, it was pursued against him by Members on the other side? Might I ask you to consider the matter again?

I was not in any way blaming the hon. Member for raising the matter as a point of order. The matter is discussed in May's "Parliamentary Practice," and the question which it is always open to ask is, from the Prime Minister, whether a statement made by a Minister represents the policy of the Government. That has always been allowed as a matter for which the Prime Minister is answerable. It does not, however, go further than that.

Further to that point of order. [HON. MEMBERS: "0h."] I have been put to a great deal of trouble over this matter, and I hope that the House will be patient with me. Are you now saying, Mr. Speaker, that in the matter of a statement made by a Parliamentary Secretary, one can ask whether it represents the policy of the Government?

Normally, it is only Ministers of Cabinet rank whose statements can be made the basis of Questions which I have mentioned as being in order. As I say, there do exist plenty of other ways in which hon. Members can obtain a remedy for erroneous statements made in the country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the recent unanimous decision by the inter-Sessional Committee at Geneva that no discriminatory safeguards should be introduced against the possible consequences of Japan's admission to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the United Kingdom will oppose Japan's application for membership to that organisation.

The report which my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind does not constitute a decision, and, while recommending that Japan should not be singled out as the one country against which there should be special safeguards, does envisage the possibility of discriminatory action against any country, including Japan, whose competition caused violent disruption of trade.

As regards Her Majesty's Government's policy in this matter, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply given on 19th February to my hon. Friend the Member for Wembley, South (Mr. Russell).

Does not my hon. Friend agree that Japan's admittance to G.A.T.T. would mean that she would then be able to claim a right to most-favoured-nation treatment, which was denied to her under the Japanese Peace Treaty, and by that means re-open the door to renewed Japanese cut-throat competition?

My hon. and gallant Friend had better put that Question down.

Is the Secretary for Overseas Trade aware that this is an exceedingly important matter and that it is a little unfair to the House to keep referring back to previous statements? Cannot we be told whether Her Majesty's Government have considered this very important matter and come to any decision as to the line they propose to take in regard to the admission of Japan either to G.A.T.T. or U.N.O.? What instructions are they to give to their representatives?

This Question refers to a "decision" which in fact is not a decision, and I have nothing to add to the statement made by my right hon. Friend last week.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when his Department anticipate completion of the winding-up of the affairs of Ernest Reid and Company.

I understand that the liquidator cannot yet say when the winding-up is likely to be completed.

Is it not a fact that the long delay which is occurring in this case is a result of the difficulty that the official receiver has in getting hold of Mr. George Dawson? In view of the fact that this gentleman is now seeking entry into the Icelandic fishing industry, what steps is my hon. Friend taking to see that there is not a repetition of the affairs of Ernest Reid and Company in any matters arising from the Icelandic fishing arrangements?

The Icelandic fishing arrangements have nothing to do with this Question. The Question on the Order Paper refers to a compulsory winding-up by an order of the court and, in view of the complexity and the mass of material to be examined, the liquidator is unable to give a date.

Did not George Dawson have a great deal to do with Ernest Reid and Company and cannot my hon. and learned Friend say whether the Official Receiver has yet taken steps to get hold of Mr. Dawson and question him about the affairs of that company?

I understood from the last reply that this matter is before the court.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. This matter is not at present before the court; that is the purpose of this Question—to try to ascertain why the long delay is occurring in publishing the findings of the Official Receiver in this matter.

I said that this was the case of a winding-up by order of the court and I am unable to give details of the progress of the liquidation. It is quite correct that I did not say that this matter is before the court.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what relaxation has now taken place in regard to the restrictions on imports of British manufactured goods into Australia; to what extent the pre-February, 1952, Australian imports position has been restored; and whether he will make a statement having special reference to the United Kingdom motor vehicles and carpet industries which have suffered most severely as a result of Australian import restrictions.

The relaxations just announced are intended, I understand, to add £40 million sterling a year to Australia's imports from non-dollar countries, excluding Japan, but it is not possible to assess their precise effect on United Kingdom exports. In the six months before March, 1952, when the import restrictions were imposed, Australia imported at the very high annual rate of £805 million sterling from these countries. In the six months July to December, 1952, Australia imported at an annual rate of £312 million from the same countries. Carpets and assembled motor vehicles are included in the category of goods for which the quota is to be increased from 20 per cent. of 1950–51 values to 30 per cent. from 1st April.

Cannot my hon. Friend be a little more forthcoming about the carpet industry? Is it not a fact that 48 per cent. of all the carpet exports from this country went to Australia in 1951? Can he say what the effect of the recent £40 million increase is going to be on the carpet industry's exports?

The trouble is that these relaxations cover a very large number of countries and a very large number of industries, and it is really impossible to give an estimate of what their effects will be on one industry.

Is it not a fact that the bulk of these increased imports as a result of this relaxation will be of capital goods and raw materials, and that the advantage to the whole of the textile industry of Britain will only be to the tune of £2 million? Is it not a demonstration of the failure of the Government to use the opportunity presented by the Commonwealth Conference for an expansion of Commonwealth trade?

As I have tried to explain before, this is a matter for the Australian Government, who naturally, for balance of payments reasons, must handle their own affairs. I cannot give an estimate of what the advantage will be in the case of a particular industry.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the fabric glove industry is equally hard hit by these import duties? Is it not time that he looked into the question from a much wider angle than he has done so far?

If my hon. and gallant Friend will look at the communiqué issued after the Commonwealth Conference, he will find that our Australian friends committed themselves very fully to look after our interests as far as they could.

Have not Her Majesty's Government taken some steps since the Commonwealth Conference to find out from Australia what quotas there are and the amounts for each particular item? We really should have some information.

Under category B, importers are allowed to switch from one commodity to another, so the Australians have given a certain amount of flexibility to importers in this matter.

Mr. Hale.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. When you called my right hon. Friend the Member for Rochester and Chatham (Mr. Bottomley) I was on my feet.

I allow only a certain amount of time for each Question, but I should have called the hon. Member if he had not been blanketed by his own Front Bench.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what effect the increased import quotas to Australia will have on British textiles.

I hope that the partial relaxation in the Australian restrictions will have a beneficial effect on our exports. Apart from yarns, textile goods fall mainly under category B of the Australian import restrictions. Licences in respect of this category can be used to import from any of a number of countries any of the goods falling within category B, and it is, therefore, not possible to make any reliable estimate of the likely increase in United Kingdom exports of textiles.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that answer, may I be allowed to tell him that I am not very much wiser? Will he bear in mind that orders for the textile industry as a result of the Coronation are already beginning to fall off? Will he communicate with our Australian friends to see what can be done for this industry which, although it has been built up, has to be kept up?

Our Australian friends are very well aware of our anxiety in this matter.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Australia is drawing considerably more for her exports of raw wool this year than last, and that her financial position should warrant the liberation of imports from this country?

That is a matter for the Australian Government. They must look after their own economy. We cannot run it from the Floor of this House.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has made, or intends to make, to the Australian Government with regard to the desirability for an increase in Australian imports of cast-iron goods from this country.

The impact of the Australian restrictions on United Kingdom industries has naturally been discussed very fully with the Commonwealth Government. The recently announced partial relaxation of the Australian restrictions will, I hope, benefit our exports of cast-iron goods.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that a more exact answer would be helpful in the circumstances? Does he realise that the exports of cast-iron goods to Australia formed a considerable part of the work in my constituency, and that one of the reasons for the anxiety about future employment in the Falkirk area is Australian import restrictions? Will he do what he can to have the level of these exports restored?

I am well aware of the anxiety of hon. Members in this matter. Cast-iron goods are restricted in different ratios according to different goods. I think I am right in saying that cast-iron exports to Australia will benefit as a result of this concession, but it is impossible to say exactly how much benefit there will be in the case of any particular commodity.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman to bear in mind that the real answer to all these questions is that if we restrict imports we shall restrict exports? That applies to all countries.

May I remind the hon. Gentleman that the Australians are very anxious also to be allowed to send their exports to this country?

The hon. Member will recall that the Australians ran into a serious balance of payments difficulty owing to the fall in the price of wool in the world markets.

Surely the hon. Gentleman recognises some responsibility on the part of Her Majesty's Government to make representations to the Australian Government on these matters?

Certainly. We are in constant touch with the Australians, who are well aware of our anxiety in this matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the estimated percentage saving in cost of a standard or average yard of cotton cloth to be secured by introduction of a two-shift system of working.

It is impossible to give an estimate. The amount would depend on the particular circumstances of the mill concerned.

Arising out of the answer—which, for a number of reasons, I did not completely hear—may I ask whether it would be a good idea in Lancashire to restore full employment to the spinning section before making appeals for altering the whole system of working in order to endeavour to secure a minor economy which is normally computed at a very small sum?

I presume that the hon. Member knows the complexity of the economic question involved, but he will have noticed that on 25th February the National Joint Advisory Council agreed that benefit might be derived by the introduction of double-shift working, and that it was a matter for local agreement by the parties concerned.

Could my hon. and learned Friend say whether it is not true that the institution of double-shift working would so reduce our costs of production as to give the fuller employment that single shifts by themselves will not provide?

I should prefer not to add, at this moment, to the conclusions reached by the National Joint Advisory Council. The economics of this question are very complicated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total of the claims submitted under the insurance of business chattels provided for by Part II of the War Damage Act, 1943; and what proportion of the total claims made have already been paid.

The total of the claims under the business scheme of Part II of the War Damage Act, 1943, is approximately £92 million, of which £66 million has already been paid. This does not include interest.

Would my hon. and learned Friend bear in mind that the general public were encouraged by the Government to insure under this scheme at the time? Is it not most unsatisfactory that more than 10 years should have passed with a large number of these claims not having been met?

If my hon. Friend will refer to the statute, he will see that under Section 85 (1) the general settlement of claims must await the fixing of a date by the Treasury.

That is a most unsatisfactory answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will send a questionnaire to manufacturers and unions connected with the furniture industry to ascertain their views on the marking of furniture with either the name and address, or the trade mark, of the manufacturer.

No, Sir.

May I ask why, when the manufacturers' association and the trade unions are in favour of furniture being thus marked, and when it is also a benefit to consumers, the Government say "No"?

My right hon. Friend informed the hon. Lady on 12th February that it was not the intention of Her Majesty's Government to provide for such marking by legislation. No doubt the merits of that decision can be debated, and an opportunity for such a debate may occur when the Merchandise Marks Bill comes before this House.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to be in a position to make an announcement about the British first feature film quota for 1953–54.

Within the next fortnight.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he has taken to ensure that Coronation souvenirs, which are not produced in this country or the Commonwealth, are not distributed or put on sale in this country.

An Order was made on 23rd June last year prohibiting, as from 27th June last, except under special licence, the import from foreign countries of souvenirs suitable for use in connection with Her Majesty's Coronation. A detailed definition of the goods affected is contained in the Order, a copy of which I am sending to my hon. Friend.

That is a very satisfactory state of affairs, but can my hon. Friend tell me whether that Order covers pencils, coloured red, white and blue and marked "Made in Germany," the importation of which has caused great annoyance to a number of people?

I should prefer my hon. Friend to put a Question on the Order Paper.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is yet in a position to announce the Government's plans for the strengthening of the Monopolies Commission; and when he anticipates introducing the necessary legislation to deal with this matter.

I would refer the hon. Member to what my right hon. Friend said during the debate on the Address on 5th November last.

Is it not since November, 1951, that we have awaited this promised legislation? Was not that one of the promises contained in the Gracious Speech? What is the matter? What is going on at the Board of Trade?

If the right hon. Gentleman will consult the answer mentioned in my original reply, he will find that that was dealt with by my right hon. Friend.

Does the Minister agree that if a policy of de-nationalisation is to lead to an extension of genuine private enterprise, it is absolutely essential that there should be some strengthening of the powers of the Monopolies Commission?

My right hon. Friend dealt with the question of legislation during the present Session. I do not think the House will expect me to make a declaration about the legislation for future Sessions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Monopolies Commission have begun their inquiry into the subject of pneumatic tyres which was referred to them on 19th September, 1952; and what progress they have made.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend understands from the Commission that they have begun the inquiry and that it is proceeding normally.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary say when the Commission are likely to report, because the cost of tyres is only one of the heavy burdens imposed on road vehicle users since this Government came into power?

We have every confidence that the Commission are getting on properly with their work. I cannot state exactly what progress has been made

Would not the Commission get on with their work even more quickly if they consisted of full-time rather than part-time members?

My hon. Friend put down a Question previously on that subject, which was answered.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage of Turkish tobacco is now included in the blends now smoked in this country; and whether, in view of the large credit on trade which this country has with Turkey, he will do everything possible to increase our purchases of tobacco from that country.

The answer to the first part of the Question is 3.75 per cent. on an average. Licences are granted freely to enable the trade to import as much Turkish tobacco as they wish, and there are no restrictions on its use.

While I realise the sensitiveness of the public over the taste of these Mediterranean tobaccos, may I ask if it would be possible to raise the percentage of the blend without causing any unfavourable reaction on public consumption?

The import of dollar tobacco is restricted to the minimum, and that should encourage the use of other kinds of leaf.

May I ask the Minister whether he has satisfied himself about the extent to which manufacturers of cigarettes, etc., in this country are mixed up with the tobacco growers in America? No self-respecting American ever smokes Virginian cigarettes.

I am not quite sure what the right hon. Gentleman deduces from that. There are questions of taste involved, as the hon. Member for Gloucestershire. West (Mr. Price) recognised.

Yes, but may I ask the Minister to answer my question? Has he satisfied himself that the manufacturers in this country are not too closely mixed up with the growers in America?

Answer.

Order. We are proceeding far beyond the original Question.

Is not it a fact that if we were in a position to buy more Greek and Turkish tobacco, we should have more American dollars, which might be used to buy sugar, and thus help to get rid of the Ministry of Food?

When considering this important question, will the Minister bear in mind that my hon. Friend the Member for Gloucestershire, West (Mr. Price) is a non-smoker?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what contacts have been made by Her Majesty's Government with the Turkish Trade Mission at present visiting this country.

Close and cordial relations have been established between the Turkish Trade Mission and Her Majesty's Government. The Mission's main contacts have been with the Ministry of Food and the Board of Trade, but in addition members of the Mission have had discussions with the Foreign Office, the Ministry of Materials and the Ministry of Supply.

is the Minister aware that there is great anxiety among the members of the Turkish Mission that, having come over here to negotiate trade treaties and further purchases from us, as well as further purchases by ourselves from Turkey, they are not able to get the question of their unfavourable balance of trade settled in a satisfactory way?

I have seen the Mission three times myself. We are well aware of their anxiety, and I think they also realise our difficulties in purchasing some of the things which they want to sell us.

Is the Minister aware that members of the Turkish Mission have said that they have foodstuffs to sell us at much cheaper prices than those at which we can buy elsewhere, and that we are refusing to buy?

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will put that Question to the Minister of Food.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why manila rope was classified as of strategic importance in December, 1952, and is not now so classified in February, 1953.

Manila rope is of strategic importance, and its export to China is prohibited on that ground. I am sorry that I misled the House in a supplementary answer I gave the hon. Gentleman on 24th February. I intended to convey to him the fact that, for balance of payments reason, we limit imports of manila hemp from which the rope is made, and there is, therefore, not an unlimited supply of manila rope in this country.

Is the Minister aware that I am glad that he has cleared up this particular muddle? While he admits that there are not sufficient supplies of manila rope in the country, may I ask him when he expects that enough rope will be available for the Government to hang themselves.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a further statement on the refusal to allow export licences to British firms for the sale of sulpha and antibiotic drugs to China.

I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave the hon. Member on 16th December. The discussions to which I referred in that answer are still proceeding.

As some time has elapsed since 16th December, when the hon. Gentleman said that active discussions were in progress with Western Germany and other European countries, can he say whether the £2 million contract, of which the first portion was £500,000, has now been sent by Western Germany to China or not?

I am not certain about the last part of the hon. Member's question. With regard to the first part, we have made some progress, but there are a number of countries involved in what is a very complicated matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when a decision regarding the reference of the activities of the London Builders' and Regional Conferences to the Monopolies Commission can be expected.

My right hon. Friend is considering this matter, but cannot yet make a statement.

In view of the fact that it is nearly six months since this matter was referred to his Department, can the Minister say why he is so tardy in protecting the local authorities and others from the harmful activities of the London Builders' Conference?

There is no foundation whatever for the innuendo in the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question. A number of matters have been suggested for reference to the Monopolies Commission, and my right hon. Friend hopes to announce very soon what will be the next reference to be made.

In view of the fact that this matter affects the interests of many people, can the hon. Gentleman say why it should take six months for the President of the Board of Trade to make up his mind? Is he not aware of the fact that all decent-minded people in this country feel that the question should have been referred immediately when my hon. Friend raised it, and will he do it now?

The question is what shall be the next reference to the Monopolies Commission, and on that subject I have already answered.

Would my hon. Friend also consider referring to the Monopolies Commission the action of the go-slow workers at certain railway stations in London?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of dutiable imports for the 12 months ended December, 1952, shown separately under the headings of the relevant Import Duties Acts; what were the amounts of duty paid; and if he will make a statement on the Government's policy on import duties.

I assume that the hon. Member has in mind the several Acts under which protective duties are imposed. With his permission, I will circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the figures for which he asks.

In reply to the third part of the Question, Her Majesty's Government consider that the tariff provides the appropriate method of protection for domestic industry and agriculture when the need for such protection has been proved. The hon. Member will be aware, however, that the United Kingdom is a contracting party to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and has, therefore, agreed to contribute to the objectives of that Agreement by entering into reciprocal and mutually advantageous arrangements directed to the reduction of tariffs.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the same kind of enmity arises in other countries which have to cope with our import restrictions of one type or another as has been indicated in this House by several hon. Members who are annoyed by the import restrictions of other countries, and will he do something to impress upon the Government the urgent necessity of an early lowering of these import duties and the removing of restrictions?

The hon. Gentleman has asked me a pretty wide question on Government policy. If he wants me to go any further into it, I should be grateful if he would put his question on the Order Paper.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the percentage fall in the internal purchasing power of the £ sterling since the Bank rate was last increased.

Four per cent. between March, 1952, and January, 1953. This figure is based on the Interim Index of Retail Prices of the Ministry of Labour.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it will come as a tremendous shock to most people in this country to learn that the internal purchasing power of the pound has fallen by 4 per cent. while the bank rate has been increased, because many people will get the impression that the policy of the Government is to make money more valuable for those who live by lending it and less valuable for those who live by earning it?

If it had not been for the monetary policy of my right hon. Friend, the increase in the Index of Retail Prices, which was six points in 1952, might have been nearer the rise of 13 points in 1951.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what he estimates the annual rate of saving to be now.

Such information as is available will be given in the next issue of the National Income and Expenditure Estimates, which it is hoped to publish shortly.