asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what arrangements he has made with each of the Dominions to allow unrestricted emigration of British nationals from Great Britain and Northern Ireland irrespective of health; and how far these arrangements prescribe standards of financial circumstances and the necessity of being of good character.

No such arrangements have been made with other member countries of the Commonwealth. The relevant requirements of these countries in regard to immigrants from the United Kingdom vary very considerably.

Is the Minister aware that at present there is nothing to prevent any Dominion or Colony from exporting their criminals here as a cheap way of getting rid of them, and that we cannot possibly send them back? Could we have Empire free trade or modified restrictions?

That is not a matter for which my Department is responsible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations on what grounds he is unwilling to hold discussions with the Government of the Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland on the subject of immigration from the United Kingdom to these Territories.

As I informed the right hon. Gentleman on 16th December, I am willing at any time to discuss with the Federal Government any aspect of immigration into the Federation, should they so wish.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that there is grave disquiet at the increasing South African immigration into these Territories, and in view of the effect that this may have on the native inhabitants of Northern Rhodesia and Nyasaland, for whom the United Kingdom Government are responsible, will he consult the Federation Government as to what steps can be taken to prevent this?

Immigration into the Federation is entirely a matter for the Government of the Federation, as was decided by Parliament.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the intense land-hunger by the Africans in Nyasaland, particularly in the Southern Province, and will he bear in mind in future discussions the matter of the quota of Europeans entering that Colony?

No, Sir. That again is entirely a matter for the Government of the Federation. The land hunger in Southern Nyasaland is partly due to the immigration from non-British territories.

I am perfectly well aware that immigration is a matter for the Federation, but I ask the hon. Gentleman to discuss this matter with them, in view of the fact that the protection of native interests is a matter for the United Kingdom Government.

Yes, Sir. But it does not come under the heading of immigration, which is entirely a matter for the Federal Government.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he has any further progress to report on the social, economic, and political development of Bechuanaland, Basutoland, and Swaziland.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reports on the three Territories in the Colonial Report series for information about progress under the first two heads. As I said in my reply to the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Fenner Brockway) on 16th December, steady progress continues to be made.

Does the Minister not agree that the development policy for the Protectorates and further north only really helps to counteract the very serious consequences which may follow from more illiberal policies elsewhere? In view of the importance of this subject, can he say when he will be able to give more information on the programme for substantial further development referred to by him on 16th December?

I hope, in due course, when the Colonial Development and Welfare Bill, which was issued to Members today, comes before the House, to be able to make a statement on that matter.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations what official suggestions have been received that Ministers from the United Kingdom should visit Australia and New Zealand more frequently.

I am not clear what the hon. and gallant Member has in mind. There have been a number of visits by members of the present Government to both Australia and New Zealand.

As there have been complaints in Australia and New Zealand that they are too often neglected in this respect, will the right hon. Gentleman advise his right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary, who also happens to be Deputy Prime Minister, that it would be a good thing if he paid a visit to our friends in Australia and New Zealand before he returns to this country from Singapore and the South-East Asian Conference?

I suggest that the hon. and gallant Gentleman should address that question to the Foreign Secretary, but I am authorised to say that the Foreign Secretary received an invitation from Mr. Holland to visit New Zealand after the Bangkok Conference, which he has had, with regret, to refuse, owing to the full programme of visits which he had already arranged to pay to other countries after the conference. Of course, I am proud that the hon. and gallant Gentleman should suggest that my right hon. and hon. Friends are in such demand, and they certainly will do their best to accept these invitations within the limits of the requirements of their Departmental duties. If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will offer to pair with me, I will do my best to see that the opportunity is properly used.

Would the hon. Gentleman ask the Foreign Secretary to reconsider this? There has been a great deal of criticism in the Australian and New Zealand Press on this matter, and it is very important that leading Ministers of the Government of this country of whatever party should visit these countries when they are near them. This point ought to be looked at again.

I am sure nobody appreciates that better than my right hon. Friend but he could not justify any further extension of his absence from the United Kingdom where, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, the pressure on him is extremely heavy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he has had with the British Standards Institution on the relationship between his Department and the Consumers' Advisory Council, in so far as the consumer industries are concerned.

The British Standards Institution has informed me of its plans, but the membership and functions of the Advisory Council on Standards for Consumer Goods are entirely a matter for the Institution.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that both the name and the terms of reference of this Council have been changed, due to criticism made in the House, and is he further aware that the industries concerned are not sure what job this Council is doing and what work it is going to do which is not being done by committees already existing?

This is an internal arrangement by the British Standards Institution. If anybody has any doubt he or she should communicate with that body.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that there is disquiet in the laundering and dry-cleaning industries concerning the non-labelling of textiles where synthetic fibres are used; that, after discussions lasting 18 months, no solution has been put forward; and if, therefore, he will set up a small committee to inquire into the problem as a matter of urgency.

I understand that recommended washing instructions for fabrics requiring special treatment have been provisionally agreed by a committee of the British Standards Institution representing the interests concerned, and that subject to final approval these will soon be issued as a British Standard.

Is the right hon. Gentleman able to say whether this will include the labelling of fabrics, stating what percentage of fibres go into their makeup?

I understand it will be open to anyone to label them accordingly.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the new regulations restricting the import of monk fish into Italy; that the operation of these new regulations was suspended until 1st January, 1955; that the present uncertainty is prejudicial to the Aberdeen fish industry; and if he will make a statement on the present position of this matter and the further representations which he is making.

Yes, Sir. The Italian authorities are still considering the representations already made on this subject, but meanwhile the application of the regulations has been further suspended until 1st March. I realise that this creates uncertainty for the Aberdeen fish industry, and the matter will be raised again in trade talks with the Italian authorities due to take place early in February.

While thanking the Minister for his efforts up to date, may I ask him whether he realises that this is a very grave interference with an important and lucrative Scottish export industry, and will he continue to press the Italian Government to abandon the regulations altogether?

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the extent to which prices have increased in relation to quality as regards children's clothing, and men's outerwear clothing, between January, 1952 and November, 1954, if he will consider reintroducing schemes requiring a minimum standard in relation to cost.

No, Sir. The retail prices of children's clothing have fallen and the prices of men's outerwear have only slightly increased during this period. I have no intention of trying to lay down specifications of clothing or to control costs of wages, raw materials, etc., on which any scheme relating standards to price would have to depend.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his statement that the cost of children's clothing had fallen is in complete contradiction to the figures in the Ministry of Labour cost-of-living gazette, and if he has no intention of doing the right thing, is it because he is not capable of doing it? Is he not aware that his predecessor had a Utility scheme for standardised items such as gent's outerwear and school gym tunics which could surely be operated without difficulty?

I do not think I can usefully add anything to the answer I have given.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the generally deteriorating standards of furniture; and what steps he is taking to prevent manufacturers exploiting the public.

No, Sir. The manufacturers of British furniture and the men and women who work in that industry are doing a good job and there is no question of their exploiting the public.

Hear, hear.

I think the hon. Gentlemen opposite have cried "Hear, hear" a bit too soon. Does the right hon. Gentleman consider that this is a good job? Here are several photographs of tables supplied by my hon. Friend the Member for Dumbartonshire, East (Mr. Bence) showing gross shoddiness in table legs, which are splitting in two?

The hon. Lady cannot make a speech about it.

I consider the reply of the right hon. Gentleman exceedingly unsatisfactory, and I ask him to consider bringing back the Utility scheme that we had when his predecessor was in office.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are two ways in which the general public can ensure that they are sold good-quality and well-designed furniture, the first being that the consumer ensures he buys from a reputable retailer, and the second being for the retailer to ensure that he buys from Wycombe manufacturers.

In view of the complacent answer given by the right hon. Gentleman this afternoon, may I ask him to consider the point put by my hon. Friend as to whether there is anything that this Government or any other Government can do to give more protection to the consumer than by a revived Utility scheme for furniture?

I should have thought that, without particularising a locality, that the advice given by my hon. Friend the Member for Wycombe (Mr. John Hall) is very sound, that is, to purchase from reputable retailers. In addition to that, it is true to say that roughly one-half to two-thirds of the United Kingdom furniture is made by firms which are licensed to use the B.S.I. Kite mark.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this particular case was brought to my notice because the management of a firm were very concerned about their workers being unhappy and morose? The reason for it, as stated by the management, was that they had heavy hire-purchase commitments for furniture bought from a reasonably reputable house, and the state of the furniture is shown by these photographs. It could not be detected until the furniture was stripped down. These photographs show a shocking standard of workmanship, and such a shocking standard of workmanship is not good for the trade. Will the right hon. Gentleman do something about it?

I do not think that any useful purpose can be served by selecting one instance of bad furniture and then attacking the whole furniture trade. I think that the men and women working in this trade are doing a good job.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade negotiations held last month.

The contracting parties are still engaged in their review of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. Pending the outcome of these discussions, I do not think that I can usefully make any statement about their progress.

When does my right hon. Friend think that he will be able to make a statement? These negotiations have been going on for a long time.

It is a very large subject. I think that the discussions will go on for another three or four weeks.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the important bearing which G.A.T.T. has on emigration from Jamaica and other Colonies to this country, and will he have it considered in that light? I want an answer to that.

I think that the hon. and learned Gentleman is trying to bring in a Question which was dealt with a little earlier.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether in these negotiations that are going on everything is being done to try to increase Empire trade?

I would rather not comment at all on these negotiations. We are in the middle of them and it is generally accepted by the House that it is unwise to express general comments at this stage.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he has had with the Governments of India and Ceylon on the export duty on tea; and what effect this duty has had on wholesale prices of stocks destined for this country.

None, Sir. I have no evidence that the export duty has had any significant effect on prices at the tea auctions in London or Calcutta.

I take it that the right hon. Gentleman does not agree with the remark of the Lord Privy Seal on the debate on the Address that these export duties have a very great effect on the price of tea in this country. I take it also that the right hon. Gentleman agrees that the Government of Ceylon and India have a perfect right to take back part of these large profits and use them for social development in their own countries?

This is a revenue matter for the Indian Government and there is no doubt that there is a limit to the extent to which we can protest about revenue action of that kind. It is not in our interests to see the export tax on tea put up—that was a fair point which my right hon. Friend was making—but this is essentially a revenue matter.

Would the Minister say what steps the Government are taking to reduce the price of tea, which is causing such grave hardship to so many sections of the community?

If I may say so, that is a different question, and should not be addressed to me.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that the export duty on tea charged by India and Ceylon is in the end paid by the British consumer?

I am not prepared to debate whether this is a tax on producer or consumer. It is undoubtedly a revenue tax imposed by the Indian Government.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why he has refused to allow the liquidator of the Raw Cotton Commission to sanction the payment of pension claims or compensation claims to former employees of the Raw Cotton Commission so as to take account of their previous employment with the Cotton Control.

I have not so refused. Such payments are governed by the original pension scheme approved under the 1947 Act, and the statutory arrangements for compensation under the Cotton Act, 1954.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that because of the winding-up of the Raw Cotton Commission the pledges given in 1948 are now, in effect, not being honoured by the present Government? Will he agree to receive a deputation of some of the many Members of Parliament who are very concerned in this matter about the fate of their constituents?

Naturally, I should be very happy to receive the right hon. Gentleman or any other hon. Member at any time, as I always am. However, the account which the right hon. Gentleman gives is not an accurate one at all. The compensation payments are governed by legislation approved by the House of Commons in 1947 and also fully debated and approved as recently as 1954.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what use it is intended to put the five flax factories which will become redundant when the Home Flax Scheme is discontinued after this year's harvest.

Discussions are in progress on the disposal of the five flax factories which will be closed after the processing of the 1954 harvest. I am not yet in a position to say to what use they will be put.

In view of our experience during the late war, is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that it is a wise policy to rely entirely upon imports for our flax supplies?

I am satisfied that this Scheme ought to be wound up, for reasons which have been explained on another occasion. It was thoroughly uneconomic and was costing a lot of money; but that is not the Question on the Order Paper.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the farmers of this country regard flax as a very unpopular crop to grow.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) when he expects to receive reports from the Monopolies Commission on the subject of restrictive practices in the sale of motor tyres and on the wider question of stop lists, exclusive dealings, and the imposition of fines on private traders by non-statutory private tribunals;

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has yet received a report from the Monopolies Commission on certain widely prevalent discriminatory and restrictive practices; or when such report is expected.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when the report of the Monopolies Commission on pneumatic tyres will be published.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when the report of the Monopolies Commission on the subject of pneumatic tyres will be published.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been drawn to cases where traders wishing to sell articles below a fixed price have been barred from doing so by various traders' organisations; whether he will state the Government's view on these practices; what action he proposes to take to stop them; and whether he will refer these practices to the Monopoly Commission.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now say when the Monopolies Commission will complete its inquiry into restrictive practices in the motor-tyre industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will refer to the Monopolies Commission the actions of trade associations in conducting courts and assuming powers to fine and cut supplies to salesmen who do not adhere to their price fixing arrangements.

I hope to receive by the middle of this year the Commission's reports on tyres and on their inquiry into the general effect of certain widely prevalent discriminatory practices, including stop lists and exclusive dealing. I think it would be best to await these reports before making up my mind on what to do about these matters.

The progress is deplorably slow, as the right hon. Gentleman will agree. Is he aware of the very strong public feeling as a result of some of the cases which have recently received publicity? In view of the bitter condemnations of such practices by himself and the Lord Chancellor before they became members of the Government, will the right hon. Gentleman now begin to take action about them?

It would be very unwise for any Government to take action ahead of these reports. The Commission was set up by Parliament for the express purposes of studying these matters. It is perfectly true that it takes the Commission some considerable time to investigate a matter of such a kind as general practices, an investigation which ranges over the whole of industry. It is much more important that the Commission should reach the right conclusion than that it should try to report much more quickly.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree with the statement made by the previous Government, that in view of the slow progress of the Monopolies Commission, though it has its part to play, it is now essential to introduce general legislation banning malpractices such as these over the whole length and breadth of British industry?

I do not think that anybody suggested that legislation should be introduced in advance of receiving a report and learning what the Commission consider it wise to do.

In view of some of the tendentious accusations which are made, might I ask my right hon. Friend to resist the attempts by old boys of the London School of Economics, who have never produced anything except economic chaos and near-bankruptcy, to wreck an industry which is giving good service to the public, and provides—

Order. This is not the time for speeches; it is the time for Questions.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Not being an old boy of the London School of Economics, might I ask whether it is in order for the hon. Gentleman to put his supplementary question without declaring his very close personal interest in the affairs of this racket?

I have declared my interest in this matter so many times that it should not be necessary for me to do so again.

rose—

Order. We had better get on with the Question. Mr. Wade.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I was in the middle of asking a supplementary question. I had not finished it. I was interrupted. I should like to know if I may finish it?

I think we had better get on. Mr. Wade.

On the subject of tyres, is the Minister aware that the case which received considerable publicity recently is not an exceptional one, and that I can give him details of a number of similar cases if he wishes? In view of the extreme form of restraint and interference with retail trading in the cases which are brought to light, can he do anything to speed up the report so that the House may be fully informed on the matter?

It would be as improper for me to comment on an individual case as it would be to comment on what my hon. Friend was saying about the matter. The whole question was referred to the Monopolies Commission. Naturally, we should like it to report as expeditiously as possible, but I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will agree that what is really important is that the Commission should be able to undertake a full and fair inquiry and present an accurate report.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the motor-car and accessory trades operate on a scandalously high margin of profit which they dare not disclose to the general public, and that they even succeeded in forcing the B.B.C. to censor the repeat programme of "Any Questions?" last Friday, which dealt with the subject?

It is not for me to deal with a B.B.C. programme which I did not hear anyway. I do not think we can usefully debate by question and answer a matter which the Monopolies Commission is studying at this moment.

Can my right hon. Friend say what happens to a manual worker when he tries to do a job below the union rate?

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that the Monopolies Commission has the staff and the organisation to undertake these very difficult inquiries which up to now have taken an unduly long time, through no fault of the Commission?

Yes, Sir, I am so satisfied. If I had any representation from the Commission that it required any further assistance from me, I should give it the most urgent and sympathetic consideration.

Is the Minister aware that, despite all the flippancy that we have heard, the serious thing about this matter is the growth in our democracy of private courts and private powers to fine people? [Interruption.] If hon. and right hon. Gentlemen opposite will keep quiet for a moment and think of the public interest instead of their own, we may get somewhere. Something ought to be done by Parliament to prevent the situation to which I have referred. The Conservative Government were going to set the people free but what they are doing is—

Speech.

Order. I have already protested against making Question time an occasion for speeches. There are plenty of other opportunities for speeches in this House.

I was diverted by interruptions, Mr. Speaker. Will the Minister discuss with his colleagues the growth of these private courts and private powers to fine people?

That is exactly the sort of matter which the Commission is now studying.

Was it not in September, 1952, that this trade was referred to the Commission? Has the investigation not taken an intolerably long time? Since the hon. Member for Heston and. Isleworth (Mr. R. Harris) has got so heated about the matter, would it not be helpful to the House if he were now clearly to declare his interest?

The time taken on all these Reports has been about the same under the previous Government and the present Government, it being about two years from the time of reference to the presentation of the full report. The present report has taken slightly longer, but it is a very complex subject.

Is it not remarkable that the industry in question is still carrying on with the practices of which we are complaining while the Commission is actually engaged in examining these complaints? Can the President not at least ask the industry to behave itself until the Commission reports?

That would prejudge the whole question which the Commission is investigating.

As we know at least one hon. Member—and by the voices raised, so are several of the hon. Members beside him—to be in favour of this, and in view of the Twickenham by-election result and the identity of the Member there, is it the view of the Government that this is a worthy practice? Do they support it? Can we have the Government's view?

The Government's view is that they should fairly administer a Statute which the House of Commons has put upon the Statute Book.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Mendelsohn case from Stockport is by no means the worst? Recent details have become available of cases, not only of snoopers, but of agents provocateurs and employees of this particular ring, going round various firms under false names luring and tricking people into selling tyres below the standard price in order that they can be fined.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how long the Monopolies Commission has been examining the position with regard to the increased prices for electric lamps and also the restrictive practices of the tyre trade; what progress has been made; and when the two reports are expected.

The reference on the supply of tyres was sent to the Commission in September. 1952 I hope to receive its report by the middle of the year. The Commission has not been asked to investigate the increased prices of electric lamps.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that when in opposition he often worked himself into a frenzy denouncing restrictive practices? Does he think that as President of the Board of Trade he is really living up to the early promise which he showed in this House?

I think so. It was not until I was appointed President of the Board of Trade that any general reference of these questions was made to the Monopolies Commission.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the concern arising from the increase in the price of petrol and diesel oil at a time when there is a world surplus of oil and profits in the industry are too high; and, in view of the harmful effect this has on the cost of living, if he will refer the matter to the Monopolies Commission.

I am continuing to bear in mind the supply of petroleum products as a possible matter for reference to the Commission.

While appreciating what the right hon. Gentleman has said, can he deny that there is an amazing degree of unanimity in the timing and the amount of the increases in the prices of petrol and oil? In view of all the factors of profit and the fact that there is a world surplus, can he not now consider reducing the prices so that there will be increased consumption and a lowering of the cost of living? In a matter of this sort, I ask him to go to it with greater speed than he has done in the past, as this breaks all the rules of competitive free enterprise?

Some of these matters will no doubt be matters which the Commission will study.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the retail price of regular grade petrol is still a penny a gallon below the controlled price of 1953?

Since these price changes are related to Gulf prices, which are quite irrelevant to our sources of supply, does he not agree that the time is long overdue to institute price control?

That is quite a different question. This is a question about the Monopolies Commission, and that is not a price control body.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he proposes to take arising out of the Report of the Monopolies Commission on the calico-printing industry.

The Government are considering this Report and the views which the industry and the Cotton Board have submitted. I shall make a further statement in due course.

Is this not a case where the Commission has already reported and the President, on top of the period which the Commission took, has himself taken nearly nine months in which to make up his own mind?

It is true that this is the only one of the Reports received on which action has not so far been announced. I have subsequently had comments submitted to me by the Federation of Calico Printers and the Cotton Board to which I am giving, as I am sure they deserve, careful study. I shall make a statement in due course.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will take steps to enable the Monopolies Commission to speed up the investigation into the manufacture of cathode ray tubes, so that the advantages of cheaper production methods can be passed on to the public.

I am satisfied that the Commission has all the facilities it needs to conduct its inquiry as expeditiously as is consistent with efficiency and fairness. I cannot prejudge the matter raised in the last part of the Question.

Is the President aware that many people with television sets, particularly poor people, are unable to use them, because they cannot afford to buy tubes, which are too expensive? Will he speed up the inquiry?

This question has only just been referred to the Commission.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will review the composition and procedure of the Monopolies Commission, with a view to enabling it to report more speedily.

No, Sir. It is equally important that a report shall be thorough and fair to all parties concerned.

In this connection will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Commission needs to speed up its work, which is of vital importance to everyone? Will not he agree that the legislative programme is so light that he could easily do this if he wished?

It is not a question of the legislative programme. What is necessary is the thorough investigation of what are often very complicated problems.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us on this side of the House supported him when he strengthened and speeded up the Monopolies Commission when he took office, and that we would further support him if he could find other methods to increase the working and the speed of its procedure, because we are wholly opposed to restrictive practices of this sort?

I appreciate what my hon. Friend has said. What I said when we introduced the legislation was that it enabled more reports to be produced because it strengthened the numbers of the Commission; but that nothing we could do could accelerate the speed at which an individual report was produced because that involved a thorough investigation of the industry concerned.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that we said that that legislation did not go far enough and that we pressed for further action? Does he know whether his hon. Friend the Member for Heston & Isleworth (Mr. R. Harris) supports the view which has just been expressed by his hon. Friend the Member for Hendon, North (Mr. C. I. Orr-Ewing)?

The right hon. Gentleman had many opportunities during his own period of office to introduce that Bill or a better one.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Monopolies Commission has yet completed its investigations into price fixing and exclusive dealing in the supply of pneumatic tyres and the supply of television cathode-ray tubes; and when he expects these respective investigations to be completed.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answers I have already given on these subjects.

Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to clarify his view on this point? Without wishing to belittle the conscientious work done by the Commission, may I ask whether he is satisfied that the procedure under the Act of 1948 is adequate? If not, has the right hon. Gentleman any alternative at all to propose to waiting for reports from the Commission?

I am certain that it would be wrong for Parliament to take action on a particular industry on any of these very controversial matters ahead of a report from the Commission.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to receive the report of the Monopolies Commission on the investigation of the television tubes industry.

I referred the supply of electronic valves and cathode ray tubes to the Commission in December last. It is not possible at this early date to say when the Commission will have completed this inquiry.

Would the Minister encourage the Commission to proceed a little more quickly on the investigation of television tubes industry than it has done with the tyre industry? Is he aware that in September, 1953, the average cost of television tubes in America was £8 7s. 5d. and in September, 1954, the average cost there was £7 5s. 7d.? Further, is he aware that no comparable price exists in Great Britain, due to the price fixing of the private monopolists which is nourished by the right hon. Gentleman's inactivity?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for the information which he has given. At the same time I would point out that the Commission is not looking essentially at prices. It is considering whether monopoly conditions operate in the industry and whether or not they are in the national interest.

Might I ask my right hon. Friend whether there are any instances where, as a result of a report by the Commission, prices to the public have been reduced at all? If not, will he please dispel this illusion that simply by referring something to the Commission one will make prices come tumbling down?

I hoped that I had made it plain that the Commission is not a price investigating or price fixing body. What it is there for is to see whether a monopoly condition exists in an industry and, if it does, to decide whether it is in the national interest that it should continue to exist. The Commission has reported on a large number of industries and action has been taken in many instances.

Is not it perfectly clear that high prices are frequently associated with restrictive practices? Is not it, therefore, very probable that in the case of the cathode-ray tubes, on which information about prices has been given, the price situation is directly due to monopolistic action of one kind or another.

It is true that high prices can be caused by all forms of restrictive practices. I think that that will be common ground on both sides of the House. At the same time, it is true that price changes can take place for many other reasons than restrictive practices. That is why I distinguish between a body like the Commission, which has an essential role of studying monopoly conditions, and some price-fixing machinery which would be quite outside that body's scope.

On a point of order. May I ask for your guidance, Mr. Speaker? It has been suggested more than once from the Opposition side of the House today that I should have disclosed my interest. I thought that you had ruled about 12 months ago that one did not have to dislose one's interest during Questions; but if one does have to, then I shall be only too pleased to do so. May I have your guidance?

Further to that point of order—

Order. I have been asked a question on a point of order. I have previously ruled that it is not necessary for an hon. Member to disclose any interest he might have in the subject matter of a Question which he addresses to a Minister.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proportion of the total trade for the United Kingdom for 1954 was done with Commonwealth countries.

About half.

In view of the fact that this is a satisfactory and developing trade, would not the President of the Board of Trade agree that it owes its success to bulk purchase and long-term trade agreements? Will he give an assurance that at the coming Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference the Government will continue that policy?

I should have said that it was part and parcel of the outstanding success of the Government's commercial and financial policy, which has enabled us to break all records in volume and value for export trade last year.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what reports he has received from the Women's Organisations' Committee, appointed by the Treasury and operating under Treasury chairmanship; if he will arrange for this committee to co-operate with the proposed Women's Committee to study retail markings; and if he will make a statement.

I understand that relations between the two bodies which the hon. Member has in mind promise to be close and cordial, and that no formal arrangements for their co-operation are necessary. Neither body reports to me.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what measures will be taken to make the findings of this Committee effective?

There are two Committees. One of them reports to the British Standards Institution and the other to the Treasury, and questions should be addressed to those respective bodies.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the latest figures for investment in industrial premises, plant, and machinery in Scotland; and how this compares with England.

The 1951 Census of Production shows investment by manufacturing industry of £40 million in Scotland and £420 million in England and Wales; the proportion of investment in Scotland is about the same as the proportion of the employed population accounted for by Scotland.

Is it not the case that for a number of years unemployment has been higher and investment lower in Scotland than in England? If that is true, can the right hon. Gentleman throw any light on why this continuing discrepancy should go on?

No doubt the hon. Member will put a Question on the Order Paper about employment. The figure of investment is less, as it is bound to be for Scotland, but if it is compared with the figures of the employed population the proportion is about the same.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what further action he has taken, or proposes to take, to increase trade between Great Britain and China.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member by my right hon. Friend on 21st December.

But that reply was not satisfactory, and neither is this. Is the President not aware that China is in a position to supply us with a number of commodities which, if we were to accept them, would save us a large amount of dollars, particularly on tobacco and coal? Is it the case that the Americans do not wish us to trade with China, and is that the reason why the right hon. Gentleman is doing nothing to try to extend trade between this country and China?

So far as I know, there is practically nothing that China can supply which she cannot freely export to this country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will arrange for British trade interests to be officially represented at the 1955 Leipzig Fair.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that other West European countries are sending either commerce councillors or representatives of their trade organisations to this fair? If he is genuinely anxious to promote East-West trade, why does he not follow their example and not let them steal a march on us all the time?

I think that the hon. Member knows that we do not recognise the East German authorities as the Government responsible for the Soviet Zone.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he proposes to implement the provisions of the Brussels Copyright Convention and the Universal Copyright Convention.

Before either of these Conventions can be ratified legislation will be necessary. I cannot say when it will be possible to introduce such legislation.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that our hanging behind has created an unfortunate impression abroad, particularly in the United States of America, which has already ratified the Universal Convention? The necessary legislation to give effect to that Convention in this country should be introduced as soon as possible, to the advantage both of national prestige and the export trade.

I fully agree with what my hon. and gallant Friend says about the desirability of ratifying this Convention. All I said was that I could not at this stage say when legislation could be introduced

Why can the President not say when legislation could be introduced? There does not seem to be much to do in this Session.

There are many desirable forms of legislation, but not all can be introduced.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that profits of tea firms have risen from less than £1,750,000 in 1952–53 to more than £7 million last year and that shareholders are receiving bonuses of up to 300 per cent.; that this is having a disturbing effect upon his plea for moderation in the matter of dividends; and if he will make a statement upon the action intended by Her Majesty's Government.

I cannot confirm the figures contained in the first part of the hon. Member's Question but I understand that they relate to the profits of companies producing tea in India, Ceylon, and elsewhere. Such profits were certainly much higher in 1954 than in 1953 but 1953 was a year of abnormally low profits and dividends. Moreover, future profits will have to bear the recent increases in the export taxes imposed by the Governments of India and Ceylon.

Is the Minister aware that we realise that that answer was rather heavy going even for him? Might I ask him whether the Government would agree to an inquiry into the profits of the tea companies so that, really and truly, we can know the position in this matter?

I see no reason whatever for an inquiry. I have given the hon. Lady the information for which she asked. If there is any more information which she requires I shall be delighted to give it to her, if I can.

Is the Economic Secretary really in no way concerned about the astonishing rise in the price of tea in the last three years? Is he aware that the price is nearly double what it was when the present Government came into office? Is not this a clear case where price control would be effective and would keep the price down to the consumer?

I am of course very concerned at the rise in the price of tea. I am also concerned that the true reasons for that rise in price should be better known to the Opposition.

On a point of order. May I have your guidance, Mr. Speaker? We have had two answers from Members of the Government on the same subject. First the President of the Board of Trade said that the rise in price was not due to the tea export duty. We have now had an answer from the Economic Secretary to the Treasury saying that it is. May we have your guidance as to which of these answers we are to take as correct?

The hon. Member must use his own judgment in that matter.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what reasons the Misses Karleen and Alison McIntosh, of 1A, Wardie Steps, Edinburgh, gave for their refusal to pay Income Tax; the amount involved and what action he took in this case.

According to the reports of the proceedings before the Edinburgh Sheriff Court, the Misses McIntosh unsuccessfully claimed that the Act of Union of 1707 has ceased to nave effect and that in consequence the Income Tax legislation no longer has validity in Scotland. The reports indicate that the total tax involved was £22 5s. 0d. Action for recovery of tax is a matter for the Inland Revenue, and I cannot, of course, disclose what has been done in a particular case.

Is not the Minister aware that these very respectable ladies have a large volume of Scottish public opinion behind them? Will not he look a little further into the matter?

These two ladies submitted to a Scottish court that the Income Tax legislation no longer operated in Scotland. I have no responsibility for the Scottish court, but it was not able to accept that interesting view.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he expects to make a statement on the Purchase Tax.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is yet in a position to make a statement on Purchase Tax, similar to that which he made in January, 1954.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a further statement about his intentions on Purchase Tax changes this year.

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend and the hon. and right hon. Gentlemen to the answer which my right hon. Friend gave to the hon. Member for Dartford (Mr. Dodds) the day before yesterday.

Yes, but that answer was not very informative. I seek to know the date when the Chancellor may make an announcement of any welcome reduction for the forthcoming year, as he did 12 months ago?

My right hon. Friend's answer two day's ago was very carefully considered, and I have nothing to add to it.

Is not the Financial Secretary aware that, by making a fair statement last year but this year making some changes and announcing that they do not prejudice the Budget position, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is really creating the maximum possible uncertainty and confusion? Why does not the Chancellor do this year the same as he did last year?

I can only answer that we must wait and see.

Can the Financial Secretary say why the Chancellor last year made a statement in January making his intentions clear, but has refused to do the same this year?

There were widespread Purchase Tax reductions in the 1953 Budget, which led to expectations a year ago that there would be further reductions in the 1954 Budget, and there were signs of a hold-up in trade. So far as I am aware, there are no similar signs at present.

Is not the refusal of the Chancellor to make a statement this year a plain hint to the trade that he means to make changes in the Budget, and will not that promote the precise depression of trade that he was so concerned to prevent last year?

I would invite the attention of the right hon. Gentleman to the statement of the Chancellor two days ago, that it would be unwise to take his statement as pointing to the likelihood of Purchase Tax changes in the next Budget.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the first instalment was paid towards the repayment of the American loan of 1946; and how much has been paid in principal and interest since that date.

The total paid so far, in principal and interest respectively, is 183 million dollars and 295 million dollars on the line of credit, and 51 million dollars and 47 million dollars on the Lend-Lease settlement. The first instalments were paid on 31st December. 1951.

Is my hon. Friend aware that comparatively few people realise that in the last three and a half years, despite the increase in the cost of social services and the heavy burden of defence, we have managed to pay these instalments to America as they fell due Does not he think that this additional evidence of our economic recovery should be more widely known?

I quite agree with my hon. Friend. The more that it is known, the better.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will give the respective increases during 1954 in prices, wage rates, dividends, company profits, and industrial share prices.

Between December, 1953, and December, 1954, the Interim Index of Retail Prices rose by 4 per cent., the index of materials used in manufacturing industry—other than food—rose by 3 per cent., import prices rose by 3 per cent., and export prices remained unchanged; the index of weekly wage rates rose by 4 per cent. The Actuaries' Investment Index of the prices of ordinary shares rose by 34 per cent.

From what the Economic Secretary says, is it not clear that a fair summing-up of last year in this respect is that wage rates rose by about the same amount as prices; that profits rose by more than twice as much; that dividends rose by four times as much and share prices by seven times as much?

I would only say to the hon. Member that if he wishes to make a fair summing-up, he should not take one year in isolation.

Is the Economic Secretary aware that the gross maldistribution of income revealed by these figures is having a serious effect in industry? May I ask whether he and the Chancellor are proposing to take any steps to correct the astonishing boom in share prices and the continuing increase in dividends?

The right hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that if he wishes to talk about the distribution of income he should ask for the figures of net receipts of income after tax.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the normal retiring age of 60 has been abolished for all direct employees of the Government, industrial and non-industrial; and whether he will give figures showing the numbers now working between the ages of 60 and 70, compared with four years ago.

Yes, Sir. On 1st January, 1954, there were just over 30,000 established and disestablished non-industrial civil servants between the ages of 60 and 70. The comparable figure for 1st January, 1950, is estimated to have been about 17,000. Similar information for industrial and temporary non-industrial civil servants is not available centrally.

Can the hon. Gentleman assure the House that there is now no Government Department which is automatically retiring people against their will at the age of 60?

I should like to read to the House a statement of principle issued to Departments in March, 1952:

" Age of 60 will in future be regarded as the minimum age of retirement and generally speaking the conception of a normal age of retirement will be abolished."