asked the President of the Board of Trade how much streptomycin was exported to China and Hong Kong in the first six months of 1950.

So far as I am aware, none, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that on 16th December the Parliamentary Secretary told the House that future exports to China for normal civilian purposes would be based on the amounts exported in the first six months of 1950? Will he give an assurance that, although we exported none during that period because we had none for export, it does not mean that we shall not export streptomycin to China for normal civilian purposes in the future?

The export of streptomycin is governed not by the exports of that particular drug during the period, but by the export of the group of drugs in which it is included.

May I press the right hon. Gentleman further on that? Will he give an assurance that there will be no ban on the export of streptomycin to China for normal civilian purposes?

I do not think I can go further than I have gone already. The amount of exports will be based upon the exports during that period, not of this specific drug, but of the group of drugs concerned.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what matters are already referred to the Monopolies Commission; what was respectively their original date of reference; when reports are anticipated; and what other matters are to be referred.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answers given on 16th and 19th December to my hon. Friends the Members for Shrewsbury (Mr. Langford-Holt) and Sevenoaks (Mr. J. Rodgers). I hope shortly to receive the report on non-ferrous metal semi-manufactures and, later this year, the report on imported timber. I cannot yet say how long it will take to complete the other outstanding inquiries, or what other matters will be referred to the Commission.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the very excellent work which the Commission are doing is to some extent being frustrated by lack of staff? Secondly, will he tell us whether he has now completed his consideration of whether he should refer the question of the textile machinery industry to the Monopolies Commission.

I endorse the hon. Gentleman's well-deserved tribute to the work of the Commission, but I am afraid that, at the moment, I am not in a position to say what further reference I shall make. That does not mean that I am not giving anxious consideration to it.

Has the right hon. Gentleman yet made up his mind about what changes should be made in the legislation under which the Monopolies Commission was appointed? Will he bear in mind that if he were to come forward with a really effective Measure, it would receive support from this side of the House, so that there is no excuse for the Government in delaying this matter on account of lack of Parliamentary time?

I will certainly give consideration to any changes which might usefully be made in the Commission, but I dealt with the prospect of forthcoming legislation in a debate some time ago

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of small businesses operating in the years 1938 and 1952, respectively.

I regret that the information is not available.

In view of the fact that this is a Question of more than academic interest, can my right hon. Friend say whether any sources of information exist?

If my hon. Friend would see me, perhaps I could assist him to get at the point which, I think, he has in mind.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say, as some guide towards the information which his hon. Friend would like to have, how many small businesses went bankrupt in 1938 and how many in 1952?

I have dealt very fully with those matters on a previous occasion. I think it is unwise to base too many deductions on them, but the fact is that a number do go bankrupt under all Governments, and probably should.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to ensure that all sizes of children's footwear manufactured in accordance with the British Standard shall be available in three fittings.

I have no powers which would enable me to put the hon. and gallant Member's suggestion into effect, but I am asking the British Standards Institution to have it considered by their technical committee on children's footwear.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the export figures for the years 1950, 1951 and 1952, for calculating machines, listing machines, including printing calculators, and for accounting, billing, book-keeping and posting machines, respectively, which were wholly manufactured by the British office machinery industry.

While I could readily give figures of our total exports of office machinery, I regret that no figures are available to indicate to what extent the machinery exported incorporated components which were not wholly of British origin.

Does that mean that my right hon. Friend cannot give me the number of wholly-British manufacturers who are engaged in the manufacture of these machines?

If my hon. Friend wishes, I can circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the total exports of office machinery, but I cannot distinguish between those which may have some non-British components in them and those which have not.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that three widths of fitting are available only in highly-priced footwear, which penalises the children of poorer parents who cannot afford to pay the high prices?

As I have said, I have no power to impose conditions on anybody, but I will draw the attention of those concerned to the hon. and gallant Member's suggestion.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if he makes this compulsory he will also make dearer the cheaper footwear?

Why?

I have neither the intention nor the power to make this compulsory.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if shoes will not fit they cannot sell them? Is not that the solution to the problem?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he is taking arising from the rejection by the Wholesale Textile Association of the quality mark scheme of the British Standards Institution for clothing.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the Wholesale Textile Association has rejected the whole "Kite Mark" scheme for quality standards for clothing; and if he will make a statement on the progress that has been made towards the setting up of quality standards schemes in the textile industry to replace the old Utility specifications.

I assume that the hon. Members have in mind the adoption by the Council of the Wholesale Textile Association of a report by one of their sub-committees to the effect that the use of a "Kite Mark" or any other general mark on textiles is unnecessary and undesirable. That, of course, in no way prevents the British Standards Institution, of which the W.T.A. is an active member, from continuing its work on the preparation of British Standards in accordance with its normal procedure. I have always made it clear that the adoption of such standards is voluntary. Similarly, any "Kite Mark" scheme for goods reaching such standards must itself be first worked out and then applied on a voluntary basis. No action on my part is required. A statement of progress was given in my reply to the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Dodds) on 5th February.

But will not the President recall that he scrapped the Utility scheme in the hope that manufacturers would voluntarily adopt the quality markings approved by the British Standards Institution? To that extent, has he not both misled himself and deluded the public?

I think not. The Wholesale Textile Association is not the only association in this field; it does not represent all the manufacturers.

Will the President give an assurance that if the association do not eventually come to some agreement on the question of standards and the quality of standards, he will reintroduce the whole procedure of the Utility specifications?

No. I think that would be a very drastic action to take.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the action which has been taken is welcomed among sections of the textile industry and that there is every hope that standards will shortly be agreed?

I am very much obliged to my hon. Friend for reminding us of that fact.

Is not this a rather serious development? The Wholesale Textile Association is a very important body and has, in effect, turned down the Government's proposals. Will not the right hon. Gentleman intervene in this matter and ask them why they have adopted this extraordinary attitude towards standards of quality?

The Wholesale Textile Association, of course, condemned the use of the "Kite Mark." They did not condemn the working out and application of standards. I think it is important to draw a distinction between the two. For my own part, I disagree with the views expressed by the Wholesale Textile Association. I think that theirs is a retrograde step, and I hope they may reconsider the matter. In general, the textile industry are genuinely seeking to work out the policy which we suggested.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is being done to provide light industry in the area covered by the Easington Rural District Council, in the county of Durham, including the new town of Peterlee.

I share the right hon. Member's desire to see some light industry introduced into this area, and I am actively trying to provide sufficient opportunities of employment here as in other parts of the North-Eastern Development Area.

Can the right hon. Gentleman account for the fact that in other parts of County Durham light industry has been established whereas nothing has been done in this area?

We are prepared to consider suitable applications for building publicly financed factories in the district. Consideration of some suggestions of that kind is being given at the present time.

I do not want to exert any undue pressure upon the right hon. Gentleman, but would he be able to give me a more favourable answer in, say, a month's time?

The right hon. Gentleman can always try.

In view of the exceptional circumstances at Peterlee, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the building of an advance factory there?

All these cases are under constant consideration.

Has there not been inadequate Parliamentary representation?

Will the right hon. Gentleman suggest to his hon. and gallant Friend that he should resign his seat and come up to my constituency and fight there?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the value of textile machinery exported has increased from £40,435,086 in the year 1950 to an amount of £50,446,766 in the year ended 31st December, 1952; and if he will give an assurance that our own textile industry will now have a prior claim on new machines in order that we may compete fairly in the world markets.

I am, of course, aware of this welcome increase. While it has been accomplished, the time taken to deliver machinery to our own textile industry has shortened considerably, and there is no need for any special priority arrangement of the kind my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind.

Will my right hon. Friend not agree that there is reason for concern in the textile industry in that our machines are being exported to our competitors overseas to compete in dollar and other markets, thus leading them to operate that type of machine? Will he make sure our textile manufacturing plants will receive those machines?

I think that those hon. Members in all parts of the House who have textile machinery manufacturers in their constituencies will agree that they are able and willing to handle exports and the re-equipment of the home industry.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind and tell his hon. and gallant Friend that there is widespread unemployment in the textile machinery industry now because countries are not able to purchase the exports of textile machinery? It is a very grave problem. So far from restricting exports, we want to increase them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress is being made with the drafting of legislation to implement the Report of the Copyright Committee; what organisations he is consulting in this connection; and whether he has accepted the recommendation of the Committee that a standing tribunal should be established to decide disputes between collecting organisations controlling performing rights and would-be users of the works controlled.

The recommendations in the Report are being carefully considered, but I have no statement to make at this stage about legislation. No organisations have yet been consulted, but a number have commented on the Report. As my hon. Friend knows, the Copyright Committee did, of course, hear the views of the organisations concerned in the course of their inquiries.

Will my right hon. Friend say, then, if he expects to be able to announce any decision this year?

I would rather not tie myself down. It is a very large, complicated Report on an extremely complicated subject.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the claims of competing organisations in the field of musical copyright especially have been the source of embarrassment and confusion, and that a standing tribunal of the nature suggested would serve a very useful purpose?

I will bear the point in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how far any payment of gold or dollars by this country is involved in the trade agreement recently concluded with Czechoslovakia.

Under the current trade and financial agreement with Czechoslovakia, which was signed on 28th September, 1949, and the schedules to which are reviewed annually, payment for imports from Czechoslovakia is made in sterling.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent, as a result of the trade agreement recently concluded with Czechoslovakia, supplies, not otherwise obtainable of sugar, fat and products containing these commodities are available to British manufacturers and consumers; and if he will abandon this method of supplementing supplies as soon as possible.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given on 20th January last to my hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, North (Mr. C. I. Orr-Ewing) which explained the origin and purpose of the five-year Anglo-Czechoslovak Trade and Financial Agreement of 1949 and gave details of the quotas fixed for sugar/fat, fondant and confectionery for the year ending June, 1953. There is also a quota of 20,000 tons of sugar for the same period. The amounts of the quotas to be fixed for imports from Czechoslovakia for the year July, 1953, to June, 1954, will be determined in the light of the conditions prevailing at the time, including the policy on imports from other sources.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that manufacturers and consumers alike desire less of these costly mixtures and more of the ingredients from which they are made, and would he represent that fact to the Minister of Food?

I will certainly bear the point in mind, but, of course, my hon. Friend will appreciate that in any agreement of this kind both sides probably accept some things which they would prefer to do without.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many materials or manufactured products cannot be purchased freely without a licence from, or the sponsorship of, his Department; whether he will give a list of such materials or manufactured products; and what is his policy towards the removal of such restrictions.

A permit from the Board of Trade is at present required for the purchase of home-produced nylon yarn for the manufacture of nylon stockings, but this arrangement will terminate on 30th April. The purchase of six other materials for use by industries for whom the Board of Trade is the production Department is subject to licensing. I am circulating the details of these arrangements in the OFFICIAL REPORT. As regards the last part of the Question, my policy on this, as on other matters, is to get rid of such restrictions as soon as conditions allow.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many orders issued by his Department are still operative which prohibit or limit the use of any material in the manufacture or construction of any article or structure; whether he will give a list of any such materials so affected; and what is his policy concerning the removal of such restrictions.

There is only one Order, namely, the Nickel Prohibited Uses (Board of Trade) Order, 1951 (S.I. 1049 of 1951): and the only materials affected are nickel and nickel alloys. As regards the last part of the Question, my policy is to remove the remaining restrictions under this Order as soon as I can; but, so long as there is a world shortage of nickel and supplies remain subject to international allocation, we must continue to exercise economy in its use and to concentrate on meeting the needs of defence and other essential industries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage was the volume of total food imports during 1952 of the volume during 1951.

The volume of imports of food and drink in 1952 was 92 per cent. of that in 1951.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to make a statement on the future policy of raw cotton importation and of his recent conversations with the trade organisations involved.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham, East (Mr. Horobin) on 5th March. I am glad to say that all the organisations which were represented on the Cotton Import Committee have agreed to be represented on the Review Committee. I am circulating the Members' names in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the trade organisations involved were pleased and satisfied with the arrangements made?

The trade organisations involved, that is, the spinners, the merchants, and the trade unions, have all expressed their willingness to co-operate in finding an answer to some of the practical problems involved, and I should like to express my appreciation of their action in this matter.

Will the right hon. Gentleman favourably consider giving the same facilities to the wool industry?

If the hon. Gentleman would like to put down a Question on the wool industry, I should consider it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the value of all forms of china, earthenware and sanitary ware exported to Australia in the last quarters of 1951 and 1952; and what estimate he has made of recovery in these export figures in the near future.

Exports of china, earthenware and sanitary ware to Australia during the last quarters of 1951 and 1952 were valued at £1,063,000 and £169,000, respectively. It is not possible to make the estimate for which the hon. Member asks in the last part of the Question.

Will the President bear in mind that exports of these commodities, certainly china and earthenware, to Australia require specific decorations to fulfil the particular type of demand? That being the case, it is difficult to re-export them to any other part of the world easily, and if the right hon. Gentleman can make representations to the Australian Government, will he please assure them that that is a further problem and difficulty of our manufacturers here?

I hope, of course, that the exports of these goods may benefit somewhat from the relaxations recently announced by the Australian Government.

Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether these articles are affected by the increase in tariffs in Australia announced a few days ago?

Not without notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the quota for the import of spring flower bulbs for the 1953–54 season has now been agreed, in view of the fact that growers must complete their contracts at an early date.

The arrangements for the import of flower bulbs for the year July, 1953, to June, 1954, are still under consideration, and I shall make an announcement as soon as I can.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the serious inconvenience and cost to growers if at a later date the total quota is below that expected, which means they must re-negotiate their contracts? Will he hasten an announcement of the quota this year?

I will announce the quota as soon as I can, but discussions with the Dutch on trade for 1953 are not quite complete.

May I stress the real urgency and importance of this matter, because already people are asking if they can put out quotations for flower bulbs for planting next spring or this autumn? It is very important that flower growers should understand what they may expect at a very early date.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the great importance of this industry, in view of the new developments in West Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly, when making his decision?

I shall certainly bear these matters in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to check the rise in unemployment in South Caernarvonshire.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him on 17th December, 1952, about unemployment in the Lleyn area. We shall continue to do what we can to help; but I would in fairness remind the hon. Member that it is not easy to encourage new industries into the area. There is, of course, as he knows, a large seasonal element in the unemployment there.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the unemployment problem in this area is now almost as bad as in pre-war days, and that we depend very largely on small but efficient engineering works, and that if he could help to take steps in those factories, by sub-contracts by Government agencies, an appreciable difference would be made? Would he look into that?

I will certainly bear in mind the points which the hon. Gentleman makes, but he will appreciate that there is a very large seasonal element in the situation in this particular area.

Is the Minister aware that his reply, referring my hon. Friend to his answer of last year, indicates that the Government have no constructive proposals to deal with the problem, and are we to assume that there is nothing at all different from last year in the Minister's approach?

I think that the hon. Gentleman adduces rather more than was implied by my answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the oil companies are boycotting new petrol-filling stations in Sheffield for which planning permission and building licences have been issued; and whether he will bring this to the notice of the Monopolies Commission.

I am aware that supplies of some brands of petrol are being withheld from some filling stations. I will bear this matter in mind in choosing matters for reference to the Monopolies Commission, and will certainly take note of any information which the hon. Member may care to send me about cases in Sheffield.

Is the Minister aware that it is not only some petrol companies which are refusing some brands, but all petrol companies are refusing all brands to particular stations in order to set up a monopoly in a particular area after planning consent has been given, and will he consider the matter?

I will give consideration to this matter in relation to any reference to the Monopolies Commission.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that, taking 1948 as 100, industrial production in Germany is now 253 and in Britain only 119; and, in view of the fact that Britain is not, and cannot become, self-supporting and must export at world competitive prices or starve, what steps he is taking to improve this state of affairs.

The need for increased exports in the face of growing competition from other supplying countries is consistently stressed by myself and other members of Her Majesty's Government. I would add, however, that the figures quoted in my hon. Friend's Question are not really comparable; Germany's industrial production in 1948 was still at a far lower level than the United Kingdom, compared with pre-war.

Will the President of the Board of Trade ask the B.B.C. to allow him to broadcast the truth of the facts to the nation before it is too late, and is he aware that if he has not the time to do that I will willingly deputise for him?

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the figures for 1938 and for last year?

Not from memory.

Can my right hon. Friend tell the House, if these figures are not comparable, what are the comparable figures between German production and British production for these years?

If my hon. Friend would like to put down a Question I will do my best to answer it. I do not carry all the production figures in my head.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the fact that during the whole period of the Labour Government production went up and up and that since this Government have been in office it has been going down and down? Is he not further aware of the fact that the best thing he can do is to ask the Prime Minister to hand in the resignation of this Government?

That is raising rather wider issues than those in the Question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the admission of Japan to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade will enable her to claim a right to most-favoured nation treatment, which was denied to her under the Japanese Peace Treaty; and if he will take this factor into account in opposing Japan's membership of the organisation.

It is, of course, true that, if we assume the obligations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade towards Japan, we shall assume an obligation to accord her most-favoured-nation treatment. But, as my hon. Friend the Secretary for Overseas Trade indicated in reply to my hon. and gallant Friend on 3rd March, the Inter-sessional Committee has suggested, in its recent report, certain provisions for permitting a suspension of obligations towards any country whose competition caused violent disruption of trade. No decisions have been made in this matter and, in considering these suggestions, we shall certainly take into account the points to which my hon. and gallant Friend has referred.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that this right to deny the most-favoured-nation treatment to Japan is the United Kingdom's most powerful weapon against cut-throat Japanese competition and that there will be much misgiving in Lancashire if that weapon is thrown away?

This raises large and complex questions of commercial policy. As I have said, no decisions have been made, but a report has been referred to the Governments concerned.

Of course we must protect ourselves against unfair Japanese production through the International Labour Organisation and in other ways, but will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that we must hold out the hope of a prosperous future to the Japanese people if they are to remain a democratic and peaceful nation?

I think that it was the object of the Inter-sessional Committee to try to find, if possible, a compromise between those two views.

Will my right hon. Friend assure the House that there will be a reasonable period during which the Japanese will be put to the test to see whether they are going to play fair in normal methods of trading?

I have said that this report has only just been received and is still under consideration.

Whatever may be the truth about Japan, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it is even more important to guarantee a prosperous future to Lancashire, and will he say what steps the Government are taking to prevent Japan seizing to its own advantage the trade with China, which the policy of the Government has prevented us from doing?

The Question refers to the specific recommendations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, but I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the interests of Lancashire are very close to my heart.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what changes he is contemplating asking Parliament to make in the Cinematograph Films Act, 1938, in the light of Mr. Justice Vaisey's judgment in the Monsoon case.

None, Sir.

May we take it from the answer that the right hon. Gentleman would regard the recent decision as applicable to the rather special facts of that case and that it will not be interpreted by the Board of Trade to exclude from the British quota certificate any genuinely made British films?

It certainly would not exclude any genuinely made British films. I think the judgment in that case was based on the facts of that case, which, as the hon. Member knows, were rather special.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he will take to arrest the decline of the British film industry, in view of uncertainty about the future of the British Film Production Fund and declining attendances at cinemas.

I cannot accept the hon. Member's suggestion that there has been a decline in British film production.

Has not the right hon. Gentleman had his attention drawn to the recent statement of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury on the declining revenue from Entertainments Duty, which the Financial Secretary admitted was partly due to a decrease in attendances at the cinemas, and will he say whether he will enter into discussions now with the Chancellor about this aspect of the matter? Also, would he, perhaps, make an announcement about the quota and the Eady Levy?

Questions of revenue, of course, should be addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but I am happy to say that the forward bookings of films at present are looking healthier than they have for some time.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement about the future of the British Film Production Fund.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the continuing uncertainty as to the future of the Eady scheme is having serious effects upon the forward prospects of British film production; and whether he is now able to say when a decision will be announced.

Yes, Sir. I am satisfied that support for British film production of the kind provided by the British Film Production Fund should continue after August, 1954, when the present scheme is due to end. I think it desirable that extension of the scheme for a period of at least three years should be achieved, if possible, by voluntary agreement within the industry. I hope that such agreement will be forthcoming; but I am convinced that the production of British films must be maintained by some such means, and, if need be, the Government will be prepared to seek powers to institute a statutory scheme.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for his helpful and welcome reply, may I ask him if he will undertake to secure a voluntary agreement between the various sections of the trade and impress upon those sections the need for such a voluntary agreement before he decides to embark on legislation?

Certainly I should very much prefer a voluntary agreement, but I have made this statement in order to give that assurance which, I think, is necessary to the production end that some such arrangements as the Eady Scheme will go on.

As it is quite certain that some of the delays are due to the fact that there are negotiations going on with the Treasury about the Entertainments Duty, will my right hon. Friend co-operate with the Chancellor with a view to trying to ensure there is no delay after the notification of the Budget details?

I regard the continuation of the British Film Production Scheme as something quite separate from the question of the level of Entertainments Duty, which must be judged every year upon its merits.

While welcoming the statement of the right hon. Gentleman, may I ask if he is satisfied that three years is really long enough for this purpose? Will he, particularly if legislation is necessary, consider extending that to, say, five years, or even longer?

I will certainly bear the right hon. Gentleman's suggestion in mind, but I think in principle we agree that an adequate period of security in this matter should be laid down in advance, preferably by voluntary agreement.

As the negotiations for a voluntary agreement have been going on for some months, would the right hon. Gentleman say what is the principal obstacle which prevents a voluntary agreement being arrived at, since negotiations have been going on for more than six months?

I do not think it would be helpful if I started to throw obstacles between the parties to a voluntary agreement. I think the best thing I can do is to encourage them to bring them to a head and offer any assistance that lies within my power.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has now made a decision about the quota of British films to be shown by exhibitors during the year beginning 1st October, 1953.

Yes, Sir. After consulting the Cinematograph Films Council I have decided not to make any Order this year to amend the Cinematograph Films (Quotas) Amendment Order, 1950, but to leave the prescribed quotas at 30 per cent. for first feature films, and 25 per cent. for the supporting programme, for the exhibitors' quota year beginning 1st October, 1953.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what percentage of post-war credits, standing in the names of deceased persons, has been paid out to-date to their next-of-kin;

I regret that this information is not available.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider paying out the post-war credits immediately on the decease of the holder, because it is quite possible that post-war credits may be held by the Treasury for decades and even centuries?

That is an interesting question, but it is not this Question.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that in many instances the wife of the deceased may be a little younger and left in dire circumstances and often dependent upon the family? Cannot there be a scheme whereby post-war credits can be paid to those families, if they find themselves in dire need?

Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will be good enough to put that question on the Order Paper.

Should not the figures asked for, at least in Question No. 29, be kept from now on, so as to show the unfairness of the present rule?

Without prejudice to the innuendo in that question, I will certainly consider my hon. Friend's suggestion.

Can the Minister state the actual reason for refusing any relaxation in this matter? Is it because the Government have not the money, or is it because of the fear of inflation? Will he tell us the actual position?

If the right hon. Gentleman will be good enough to put down a Question on the subject, I shall be glad to answer it.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in framing his Budget, he will improve the conditions on which post-war credits are held, by enabling holders of these credits to secure repayment earlier than they can at present do so.

I regret that I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's Budget statement.

Does the Minister not realise that unfavourable conditions were introduced after post-war credits were instituted and that is a breach of faith to the people who hold post-war credits? Does he not also realise that this is a matter which should be rectified, and will he take steps to rectify it in the interests of honesty and fair play?

While not accepting the suggestion of the hon. and learned Gentleman that there was any breach of faith, I am bound to remind him that if there were, nothing was done to put that right during the six years of the previous Administration.

Now that the hon. Gentleman has shown that he is not prepared to answer questions about the past and cannot answer questions about the future, will he say what he can answer?

The right hon. Gentleman might recall that in my previous answer to a supplementary question I drew his attention and that of the House to the past of the previous Administration.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider taking steps to issue Government securities with guaranteed purchasing power, with the amount of interest and capital repayment based on the cost of living, in order to encourage saving.

No, Sir.

Will not the Financial Secretary agree that the continuing fall in the value of money has made the interest on post office deposits a negative quantity, and cannot he frame some sort of security to attract more savings which would guarantee the integrity of the capital value?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is a little out of date in the implication of his supplementary question. I would draw his attention to the fact that the cost-of-living index figure today is at the same level as it was last June.

Would the Minister consult the right hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Dalton) as to the kind of security to issue?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in his next Budget, he will endeavour to remove some of the anomalies of Purchase Tax, in accordance with the list of suggestions recently sent to him by the hon. and gallant Member for Portsmouth, West.

My right hon. Friend will bear in mind my hon. and gallant Friend's suggestions.

Will my hon. Friend use his best endeavours on the chance that Purchase Tax may also be removed from essential articles in every-day use?

I have read my hon. and gallant Friend's letter on that subject.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will set up a committee of people in touch with the necessities of everyday life to advise him on the anomalies of Purchase Tax and the articles of common usage which should, to reduce the cost of living, be relieved of Purchase Tax.

No, Sir.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the whole matter is in complete chaos, and is it not about time that the Treasury got some people who really understood this Purchase Tax question?

So far as any anomalies which my hon. Friend may have in mind are concerned, I have never found that we have any lack of assistance on this subject both from the industries concerned and from hon. Members.

Does not the hon. Lady realise——

Order.

Let him have his say.

Does not the hon. Lady realise——

Questions have to be addressed to Ministers, not to hon. Members.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in his next Budget, he will reduce or eliminate petrol tax on public transport as this is the main reason for the increase in fares.

I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's Budget statement.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the tax on petrol and diesel oil affects the cost of living, and will he try to do something about it?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will allow increased credit facilities to be available, if required, to carry out the financing and marketing of the abnormally large quantities of timber which will be processed in Scotland this year.

The provision of credit is a matter for the banks, and I have no reason to doubt that all justifiable needs of credit for the marketing of timber this year will be met.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the prohibition of the expenditure of sterling by British travellers in foreign ships cannot be enforced in Italian ships which present to them wine lists that give prices in sterling but not in lire; and what steps he is taking to prevent this breach of British law by such travellers.

We cannot prevent foreign ships from offering prices in sterling. While I deprecate this practice, I do not agree that this makes it impossible for British travellers to comply with our exchange-control rules.

Is my hon. Friend aware that these ships print two lists, one in sterling and one in lire, and not only do they induce British travellers to break the British law by showing them only the sterling list, but they also diddle them by converting lire to sterling at a too low rate of exchange and by not including the cheapest wines in the sterling list at all? They carry British mails.

I am glad that my hon. Friend's researches were sufficiently exhaustive to prevent his being diddled.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the estimated cost to the Treasury would be, using the basis of the figures available for last year, if the foreign exchange allowance for United Kingdom tourists travelling outside the sterling area for the present year were increased to £35 per tourist.

I estimate that the additional cost in foreign exchange might be from £5 to £6 million in a full year.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the Government hope to make their announcement about the foreign exchange allowance for tourists?

I cannot add anything to the very full reply made by my right hon. Friend on 23rd February.

But that was not an answer at all. It was a complete evasion.

Will the hon. Gentleman convey to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that it is our hope that when he next comes to make a statement on the subject he will do so in a better temper than he did last time?

I shall be glad to convey to my right hon. Friend any serious point made by the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to state the total cost of labour and materials used in minting the new crown pieces.

It would not be in the public interest to disclose the figure asked for by the hon. and gallant Member.

Is not that a really astonishing statement? How is it that this decision has suddenly been arrived at? Is it because we have discovered, after questioning, that it costs a halfpenny to make a farthing? What is the reason for the refusal to give the cost?

The reason is that the Royal Mint undertakes a considerable amount of work for foreign Governments in respect of which it has to tender against competition. It would obviously hinder it in its admirable activities as a trading concern doing work for foreign Governments if details of its costs had to be disclosed to its competitors.

Is it a fact, therefore, that it mints crowns for foreign Governments—and, if so, which Governments—but does not mint farthings for foreign Governments, because we have been given the costs in that case?

If the hon. and learned Gentleman will put that question down I shall be glad to answer it.

Is this a change of policy, or has the Government's spokesman always refused to give the cost?

I do not want to embarrass the right hon. Gentleman, but there are a number of precedents for refusing disclosure and, I think, only one, the farthing, for revealing the cost.

Will my hon. Friend say whether he is likely to refer the activities of the Royal Mint to the Monopolies Commission?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the estimated annual saving which will be effected by the extinction of the Ministry of Pensions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the estimated saving in money and staff of the decision to combine the Ministry of National Insurance and the Ministry of Pensions, giving separate figures for 1953–54 and the first full year of the amalgamation.

I have nothing to add to the reply which my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave to the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay) on 2nd March.

Are we to understand that the Government have taken the decision while being entirely in the dark about the saving in staff and money? Before such an attack was made upon ex-Service men, surely there must have been good grounds for it?

While not accepting the implication of the last part of the supplementary question, which is a very obverse fact, I must remind the hon. Gentleman that the supplementary question was both asked of and answered by my right hon. Friend.

Though it may not be surprising to find that the hon. Gentleman cannot answer the question, are we now to understand that the Treasury also does not know the figures?

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman would like to put that question to my right hon. Friend.

In view of the obvious reluctance of the Government to give any of these figures, are we to understand that, instead of there being a saving, there will be increased cost under this arrangement?

No, Sir.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, whatever is the amount of the financial saving compatible with an efficient service to the pensioner, it will be extremely welcome to the taxpayers? Is my hon. Friend also aware that the general body of taxpayers will welcome this measure as a precursor to the elimination of the Ministry of Food and the Ministry of Materials?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will now settle all claims still outstanding for business chattels insured under Part II of the War Damage Act, 1943.