asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Women's Organisations Committee for Economic Information, meeting in Glasgow under the auspices of the Treasury, expressed concern at the lack of exact reliable labelling of materials; and what steps are proposed by his Department to remedy this deficiency.

I understand this matter was mentioned but that the committee has made no recommendations. On the second part of the Question, I have nothing to add to my reply of 3rd February to the hon. Member.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these women in Glasgow were well equipped for judging consumer goods? Is he also aware that they were not able to form an opinion on new fabrics and mixtures because of the introduction of nylon, terylene, and Ardil, and is he prepared to do anything at all about the proper labelling of these fabrics?

As the hon. Lady knows, I have a higher opinion of the ability of the housewives of this country to judge consumer needs than she has.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the subjects which he discussed recently with trade delegations from West Germany and East Germany, respectively; and to make a statement indicating how the results of these conversations will affect British import and export trade.

The trade talks with Western Germany last December were mainly concerned with the negotiation of quotas for 1955 for the relatively small range of goods still subject to import restrictions,

Does the Minister not realise that there are important gaps in trade, industrial and commercial relations between this country and the two parts of Germany? Did his talks have nothing to do with this, and is he doing nothing about those gaps?

The hon. and learned Gentleman knows that we have to keep them rather separate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the disquiet among the shopping public, and reputable manufacturers, at the lack of quality guarantees for merchandise; and if, where trade or industry refuse to provide such standard quality marks, the Government will authorise the British Standards Institution to issue such quality marks itself.

I am in favour of the wider adoption of standards and quality marks, but I cannot believe this would be achieved by issuing such marks without the co-operation of the manufacturers concerned.

What does the right hon. Gentleman propose to do about the guarantees which he gave to this House as long ago as 1952? Is he aware that these guarantees, from the rayon and cotton industries, were that standards would be provided, that these standards have not been provided, and that the right hon. Gentleman has done nothing about it?

As the hon. Lady knows, I am not altogether satisfied with the progress of the introduction of standard marks in the industry, but I am satisfied that we are adopting the right procedure through the British Standards Institution.

What consolation is it to the consumers to know that the right hon. Gentleman is not satisfied if he does nothing about it?

The consumers of this country at the present time have a very wide choice of high-quality goods.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total value of cotton textile imports into this country in 1953 and 1954, respectively; and what percentage in each year was due to imports from India.

Imports of cotton textiles from all countries were valued at £28 million in 1954; this compares with £15 million in 1953 and an average of £33 million for the six years from 1948–53. Imports from India were 8 per cent. of the value in 1953 and 25 per cent. of the value in 1954.

Does the Minister realise that this means that in 12 months the value of Indian imports has gone up from £1 million to £7 million, that that cannot go on for very much longer, and what is he going to do about it?

What it means is that the imports for 1954 went up above those of 1953 but were lower than the average for 1948–53.

But during the last year they have increased very much more proportionately than total imports and India is the main culprit in this matter. What is the right hon. Gentleman doing about it?

The hon. Gentleman is quite right in saying that India has been the principal supplier of the increased imports. With regard to action that could be taken, I would refer the hon. Member to the very full statement that I made on a previous occasion.

The President knows perfectly well that in the earlier period we were only too glad to get the cotton because Lancashire could not supply it and it was needed for re-export. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while we on this side of the House would not wish to invoke protectionism on behalf of Lancashire against fair trade and fair imports coming into this country, this trade is particularly unfair because the Indian manufacturers get their raw cotton at prices about 1Od. or 1s. cheaper than our manufacturers do, and even if our weavers worked for no wages at all we could not meet this competition? Therefore, what will the right hon. Gentleman do about it?

I am quite aware of the arguments raised on this matter. The right hon. Gentleman must realise that they go very wide. Raw materials in this country are on occasion supplied to manufacturers below world prices. On the general question of action to be taken, I have nothing at this stage to add to what I have said on previous occasions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many new firms, new factories or extensions to existing factories are at present in Burnley as a consequence of his Department's direction or support since February, 1953, when the town was scheduled as part of a Development Area.

North-east Lancashire was made a Development Area on 3rd March, 1953. Two extensions approved since that date have been completed in the County Borough of Burnley, extensions to four other factories are under construction, at least one firm new to Burnley has acquired premises there, and within three miles of Burnley the Board of Trade is building the largest factory which it has ever undertaken in any Development Area.

These extensions are not made at the expense of the Government but by the local authority. What extensions have been undertaken by the Government? In any case, does the Minister realise that when this factory is completed, it will employ only 1,500, whereas the leakage from the area is 2,300 insured persons per year?

I will not split hairs as to who should take the credit. Let us all share in that, and welcome the fact that all this development is going on, and thriving, around Burnley.

The Government are bringing only one firm to the area and are neglecting to offer grants in prepared sites.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) how many applications in Wales for factory building or extension between the sizes of 5,000 and 20,000 square feet were authorised in 1953 and 1954, respectively; and how many were refused;

The area figures were 44 in 1953 and 52 in 1954. None were refused. I have not got the value figures.

Does that represent an increase over 1953 or not?

It is an increase in the area figures, I believe, but I should like to look at the point again.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proportion of applications in the United Kingdom for factory building or extension were granted in Wales in 1953 and 1954, respectively; and what proportion of those refused were in Wales in each of those years.

5·7 per cent. and 3·7 per cent. were aproved, and none refused.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the fact that the overseas market in Lancashire textiles is shrinking through unfair foreign competition, what steps are being taken to preserve the home-trade market for Lancashire textiles.

Without commenting on the reasons advanced by the hon. Member, I think he is right in drawing attention to the fact that the problem facing the Lancashire textile industries is primarily one of falling exports rather than rising imports. On the second part of his Question, the home market for United Kingdom textiles is protected by a tariff on all imports other than those from the Commonwealth, and limited by a quota in the case of Japan under our trade and payments agreement with her. United Kingdom production of cloth today commands over 90 per cent. of the home market.

Does the Minister realise that drills from Bombay are being quoted in this country at 19¼ pence per yard, and check tea-towels at 8s. 3d. per dozen, and is the home trade to go the same way as the export trade? Is the Minister doing anything to protect the home trade?

The hon. Gentleman asked for the measures of protection, which I have set out clearly in the answer to the Question.

What representations has my right hon. Friend received from the official organisations of the industry setting out detailed proposals to protect the home market from imports of Indian cloth?

Up to the present I have had no detailed or specific proposals for action, although many people have said that action ought to be taken. I have invited the Cotton Board to come and see me and to put before me the kind of action which it would regard as appropriate, if it were decided that action should be taken.

Since the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade last week did not seem to be aware that Lancashire cotton piece-goods exports are lower now than in any peace-time period for over a century, will the right hon. Gentleman not recognise that one of the main reasons for this, quite apart from Indian competition, is that some of the warnings we gave in this House a year ago about the Anglo-Japanese Trade and Payments Agreement are now bearing fruit, particularly in certain colonial markets?

The fact that the Anglo-Japanese Trade and Payments Agreement fixes a precise and definite limit upon the imports of Japanese cloth into this market at the present time——

On a point of order——

One moment, let me finish the answer. With regard to exports, it would scarcely help the export trade of this country in textiles if I were to cut off the supply of Indian gray upon which a substantial part of the trade is based.

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

asked the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he had with the Prime Ministers of India and Ceylon during their recent visits to this country on the export duty on tea.

None, Sir.

But does not the President of the Board of Trade realise that the people of this country are convinced that it is entirely the fault of the Government that the price of tea is so absurdly high, which is borne out by what the Prime Minister of Ceylon said? Does the Minister really mean that he did not take any opportunity of having discussions about this matter with either of those Prime Ministers during their recent visit?

With the hon. Gentleman, the wish is father to the thought in this matter. I do not think I can add to the full statements and answers given on this matter by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and by my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he pro poses to take on the Hodgson Report on Weights and Measures.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, North (Mrs. Slater) on 9th December last.

Is the Minister aware that this matter is of considerable concern to the fruit trade, which is most anxious for a definite decision? Will he be good enough to give the matter urgent consideration?

Yes, I will certainly bear in mind what the hon. Gentleman says about this important subject, but there can be no question of legislation this Session.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he intends to take, in view of the major difficulties which have faced the National Research Development Corporation as described in the Corporation's Report for 1953–54.

They have already been taken. As the Development Corporation made clear in its Report, one of the difficulties which confronted it was dealt with by legislation, one in conjunction with the Board of Trade, and the third it is dealing with.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that some retail coal merchants are still delivering domestic coal without any kind of invoice and without carrying scales on which bags of coal might be checked by the consumer; and if he will take additional steps to safeguard householders against unfair trading practices in this matter.

Under the Weights and Measures Acts, the enforcement of which rests with local authorities, weight tickets are required in the case of coal only when sales exceed 2 cwts. These Acts do not require coal vehicles to carry scales, but local authorities may prescribe this by by-law.

Has the attention of the Minister been drawn to a report published by the Middlesex County Council a month or two ago, showing that its inspectors had examined about 9,000 bags of coal and that in one in four there was short-weight? When will the Minister, in conjunction with the local authorities, take active steps to show the tiniest flicker of interest in the interests of the consumer?

My thoughts were more with Fife than Middlesex, but I am grateful for the information, and as the hon. Gentleman has a Question down about what is happening in Fife, I will reserve my fire for that one.

I will ask that Question now.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what information he has concerning the nature of the checks made on coal deliveries by the inspectors of weights and measures in Scotland; and whether he is satisfied that such checks are adequate to safeguard the interests of the domestic consumer.

I am informed that 25,695 bags and 659 loads of coal were checked by inspectors of weights and measures in Scotland during the course of 12 months. I have no reason to believe that they checked too few.

Is the Minister aware that I am not so much interested in how many were checked as in how many there was short-weight? Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how many prosecutions took place as a result of those inspections, and the nature of the fines imposed?

There were 1,992 bags and 48 loads of coal which did not contain the correct weight. There were 49 successful prosecutions about those, and there were also 36 successful prosecutions under by-laws for other related offences, such as not carrying weighing machines. I do not think I know the extent of the fines.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the duration of the current Anglo-American Films Agreement.

Until 24th September, 1955, unless renewed.

As, under present arrangements, 70 per cent. of all films shown over here are American, while of films shown in America only 1 per cent. are British, does not my right hon. Friend think that is too great a disparity, even taking into account the difference in size between the two national industries; and when the time comes to negotiate a new agreement, will he do his best to impress on our American friends the need for a greater degree of reciprocity than has been shown up to now?

I much appreciate what my hon. Friend has in mind, but he will recognise that the exhibitors are separate from the producers and those with whom we are negotiating these Agreements, but I am not unsympathetic to the views he has expressed.

Can the President of the Board of Trade say why dollar expenditure on this import, much of which is second rate, is going on at a time when our gold and dollar reserves are going down, our imports are excessive, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer is very worried about the whole situation?

Largely because a lot of people like to see these American films.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what applications he has received to allow import into the United Kingdom, from the Eastern Zone of Germany, of brown coal briquettes of good calorific value and less smoky in the burning than bituminous coal; and, in view of Great Britain now being one of the largest importers of coal in the world, what steps he is taking to encourage imports from such Iron Curtain countries as may be able to contribute to Britain's coal deficit;

Apart from occasional shipments of coal from the Irish Republic, I have received in the last six months one application from a private trader to import coal briquettes from the Eastern Zone of Germany and two applications to import sample quantities of coal from other sources. These applications have been approved.

Might I ask my right hon. Friend two points arising from his reply? First, is it the Government's policy to encourage the increasing participation of private-enterprise merchants in the import of coal? Secondly, why should not coal now be placed on open general licence, as the United Kingdom is the largest importer of coal in the world, and will this year be importing £25 million worth of coal and probably a great deal more next year?

In reply to my hon. Friend's first supplementary question, I do not think there is anything to discourage them, because the Coal Industry Nationalisation Act, 1946, does not confer a coal importing monopoly on the National Coal Board. With regard to the second supplementary question, the arrangements are simply that coal is placed on specific licensing, or open individual licensing in the case of the National Coal Board, and the total amounts are discussed with the Board. I think that is a perfectly satisfactory method. If anybody wants to import coal, all he has to do is to ask for a licence.

Is not the high standard of fuel produced by Germany due to the fact that the industry there is run by private enterprise?

Has the right hon. Gentleman any information about the price of the imported coal? Will the private importer have to make his price plus the profit out of his own sales without affecting the National Coal Board?

If we are to go into questions about the prices and quantities of coal, I think the matter should be referred to the Minister of Fuel and Power.

In view of the controversial nature of my right hon. Friend's reply, I give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of the companies declared bankrupt in 1951, 1952, 1953, and 1954; and how many of these were tea companies.

Four hundred and seven, 436, 421, 416, and none.

Can the President explain that, because the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Food stated on Monday week that the poor old tea companies are in dire straits and hence have had to put up the price of tea to prevent some of them from "going broke"? Does he remember how many tea companies have "gone broke" over the last few years? Is there any fear of them "going broke" in view of the continual rise in price?

It seems to me that the supplementary question should be directed to the Minister of Food.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has considered the proposals put to his Department by representatives of cotton employers and trade unions on 15th February on the problems created in Lancashire by the import of Indian cloth; and whether he will make a statement.

I have very carefully considered the report which my right hon. Friend the Minister of State made to me about the meetings in Manchester on 15th February. I am now awaiting the specific suggestions which I have invited the Cotton Board to make to me upon this topic.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, when the Minister of State met the master cotton spinners and the textile workers in Manchester last week, they passed a resolution expressing complete dissatisfaction with the Government's activity in this matter? Can he tell the House what there is to stop him from getting in touch with the Indian Government now to see if some voluntary arrangement cannot be made to limit this disastrous flood of unfairly competitive imports?

I think it would be better to await the visit of the Cotton Board, which represents all sections of the industry, including the trade unions, to me to make any specific proposals which it thinks appropriate.

Will the right hon. Gentleman suggest to the Indian Government that they might take the export duty off tea and put it on cotton piece-goods instead?

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind, when considering this problem, the possible repercussions on our large and growing exports to America which are below the cost of production in America?

I certainly shall bear in mind in all these matters—I hope we all shall—the important effects upon our whole commercial policy of precipitate action in a field of this sort.

Will not my right hon. Friend agree that the main reason for the cheapness of the Indian cotton exports is the concealed subsidy which is granted by the Indian Government to the Indian mill owners, and that if the subsidy were removed Lancashire would be able to cope with the Indian competition? Is he aware that all that Lancashire is asking is to be able to compete on level terms?

This is a complex field, and I hope that hon. Members will be a little careful even about bandying terms like "concealed subsidy" when they are considering the prices of raw materials supplied to industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the heavy increase in the value of imports of medicinal and pharmaceutical products during 1954, as compared with 1953; and to what extent this increase is due to increased imports from the United States of America.

Yes, Sir. Nearly 60 per cent.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in the case of certain products, such as antibiotics, the imports are more than double those of the previous figure? Will he do something more to encourage home production of these products, in view of the many firms in this country which are producing goods of that kind?

I imagine that the imports have increased because some of the new drugs have been developed and produced in the United States, and I think it is right that the people of this country should have access to them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in many cases this involves some fairly heavy payments to the United States, which makes a considerable drain on our dollar resources?

I am as anxious as anyone to conserve our dollar resources. We have to spend them wisely. However, I should have thought that we should have hesitated before we restricted the supply of up-to-date drugs for healing sickness.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the Government's proposals for averting the threat of increasing unemployment in the cotton industry.

There is very little unemployment in the cotton industry at present. Future trends will depend on many factors and not the least of these is confidence. The industry's problems are associated at least as much with exports as with imports and I have arranged to discuss these problems with the Cotton Board.

Is there not already a good deal of short-time working? Is it not better to avert unemployment rather than wait for it actually to break out? Does not the President think it is time to make a high-level approach to the Indian Government to try to get trade on to a rather fairer basis, as both the raw material prices and the respective tariffs are at present on an unfair basis?

The short-time working in cotton and rayon spinning and weaving last week was about 1 per cent. About half of it was in the fine spinning section, which is not directly affected by the foreign grey cloth imports. I do not say that that means that foreign grey is not a problem; I am merely giving the facts about the short-time working. I think that, on the whole, it would be better to await the discussion which I am to have with the Cotton Board, when we can go into these facts and see what detailed proposals can be put forward.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that one way of coping with the threat of unemployment in the cotton industry is to diversify industry in that area, and that it was with that object that more than a year ago he declared part of the area a Development Area, but that so far there is the deepest and most widespread disappointment at the results of his endeavours?

I am most grateful to the hon. Gentleman for reminding me and the House of the fact that it is in that very area that we are in process of building the largest development factory ever undertaken by the Board of Trade under any Government.

What causes the President to suppose that at his proposed interview with the Cotton Board he will be in a position to give it better answers than the Parliamentary Secretary was able to give at the meeting last week in Manchester? Why could the answers not be given then?

What I am asking the Cotton Board to do is to come along to me and to make certain proposals and suggestions about the kind of specific action which it has in mind.

Will the President consider publishing the details of the discussions with the Cotton Board as a White Paper after the discussions have been concluded?

We had better see what the discussions are.

While it is no doubt desirable that the President of the Board of Trade should have further talks with the Cotton Board, is it not time that he made plans for serious talks with the Indian Government? Does he not agree that there is no doubt that the Indian producers do have a definitely unfair advantage in the price of the raw material, and that there is great unfairness in regard to the tariff structures in our country and in India? If these are the facts, is it not high time that the President took this matter seriously and arranged, if necessary, to go to India himself to discuss the matter?

Very full discussions upon these issues did take place between the Indian Government and my right hon. Friend the Minister of State. Certainly I am not saying that that is the last word between us and the Indian Government. But, at the same time, it would be very appropriate if first of all we had further discussions with the Cotton Board about imports of grey cloth. On the export side, I should like to emphasise again that I do not think that it is a fair situation that they should be charging the rates of tariff that they are charging at the present time. That is a very difficult thing for them to defend.

Is the President aware that the Minister of State last week was reported as having specifically said in Manchester, in answer to a question, that he did not have negotiations with the Indian Government? Now the President is telling us the the Minister of State had discussions with the Indian Government. Can we be told exactly what did happen?

Certainly it is very important to emphasise that no question of negotiating the Indian Trade Agreement arose at that time and it has not arisen at this.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has considered the protests of Scotland's 2,500 retail drapers against price-fixing in the drapery and fashion trades, which have been sent to him; if he is aware that agreements which will completely eliminate competition in the retail trade are being made; and if he will refer these practices to the Monopolies Commission.

I have noted these representations. It would, I think, be wise to await the Commission's Report on its existing inquiry under Section 15 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Act, 1948, which has a close bearing on these matters.

Is the President aware that we have now reached the stage where to have a Question on the Order Paper to him indicates the triumph of hope over experience? Would he take a sniff of analgesia and try to give birth to an idea?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can now say when the report of the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Commission may be expected on the Cellophane paper manufacturing industry.

No reference on this matter has been made to the Commission.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that it is a considerable time since I referred certain correspondence to him? Has he given consideration to the representations made therein? If so, is he not aware that it does appear that a price ring operates in this industry; and would that not be sufficient reason for referring it to the Commission?

As I understand it, Cellophane is a trade name, and one really cannot accuse of monopoly a man who is merely manufacturing a product under a trade name. If the hon. Member has any other information, I shall be happy to look into it.

I have submitted the correspondence to the President of the Board of Trade through his Parliamentary Secretary, and I expected that he would have looked at that correspondence before answering my Question today.

I am anxious to help the hon. Member in any way I can. On the information at present at my disposal, I do not see that this can be a case for the Monopolies Commission, but if there is further information, I shall be happy to look into it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has now considered the terms of a resolution passed by Bristol City Council on 8th February, and submitted to him, protesting against the price maintenance activities of the petroleum and diesel oil industry in maintaining and increasing prices by collective action; and whether he will now refer this industry to the Restrictive Practices Commission for investigation as requested by the council.

I have noted the terms of the resolution, and, as I have already told the House, I will continue to bear in mind the supply of petroleum products as a possible matter for reference to the Commission.

The President of the Board of Trade recently answered questions on this subject, and said that he had the matter under consideration. May I ask him whether he has now concluded his consideration, and, in view of the very serious situation which has arisen in relation both to municipal and privately-owned public service undertakings, many of which have had to increase fares, will he come to some conclusion about referring this industry to the Commission? Further, has his attention been called to a statement by the Economic Commission for Europe on this subject?

Both the previous Government and this one have kept to what I think is a sensible rule, which is not to debate possible candidates for the Commission in advance of them being referred to it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement giving details of the machinery in his Department for the initiation of prosecutions under the Merchandise Marks Acts and, as shoppers are not clear as to the scope of his Department in such matters, if he is now prepared to act for the general public where complaints of worthless merchandise are concerned.

I have no statutory responsibility for determining the worth of any particular merchandise. Arrangements are made by my Prosecutions Branch to investigate complaints of alleged offences against the Merchandise Marks Acts. Proceedings are then instituted where warranted by the evidence disclosed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the public is getting rather tired of this type of answer from him? Will he please give a straight answer to a straight question? Will he tell the House whether, if somebody buys some goods in a shop and those goods are worthless, and the shop refuses to do anything about it and that complaint is sent to the Board of Trade, he is prepared to take it up?

I have emphasised quite clearly that the Board of Trade is not established to determine the worth or value of individual merchandise. On the question of the Merchandise Marks Acts, between July, 1945, and October, 1951, there were two prosecutions, both successful. Between 10th October, 1951, and 21st February, 1955, there have been no fewer than 19, of which 16 were successful.

Owing to the very unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the comparative figures of the exports of lace nets and curtains for 1952, 1953, and 1954.

Total lace exports other than by parcel post were £4·6, £4·7, and £4·7 million.

About 12 months ago the President assured me that he was concerned about the fall in exports in this trade, and promised to take a personal interest in these figures in the future. Is he satisfied with the position as reflected in these figures?

Both the hon. Member and I can be satisfied. The industry has done very well, and is exporting well over one-third of its total production.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps the Government propose to take to ascertain the causes for the decline in exports from the United Kingdom, especially between this country and Canada; and what action he proposes to take to remedy this position.

Exports from the United Kingdom have gone up, not down. In 1954 we sold a record amount both in volume and in value. This record was achieved despite the fall in exports to Canada due to a shrinkage in Canadian demand, which was felt equally by Canadian manufacturers. I am confident that this is only a temporary phase, and that our manufacturers and exporters will continue their efforts to retain their share of this important market.

I wanted to direct the President's attention to those countries, our exports to which have fallen, and Canada was a particular example. Is he satisfied that all the steps he has taken up to the present are the only steps to remedy this very difficult and dangerous position? I think that the figure is a 12 per cent. fall in the export trade.

Both industry and the Government have done very well in this situation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether agreement has yet been reached with the other Western countries concerned about the export of ships to Eastern Europe; and what further discussions are taking place on this question.

The present control on the export of ships to Eastern Europe is operated in agreement with the other countries concerned: discussions about these controls are going ahead.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on Thursday it will be exactly a year ago that the Prime Minister called for greater trade and greater exports to Eastern Europe, and that it took the right hon. Gentleman four or five months to announce the first series of changes in the restrictions? He said at that time that he could not reach agreement on ships. When does he expect to be able to reach agreement with the other countries about this question of ships, when he has already taken 12 months?

The right hon. Gentleman is quite right in pointing out the wide extensions in East-West trade achieved as a result of the efforts of Her Majesty's Government. The situation to date about ships is that certain ships are subject to an embargo and certain others are sold under a procedure whereby a contract is entered into and notification given afterwards. There has been some discussion as to whether restrictions should be tightened up or not, but on the whole I have seen no proposals which I think would be appropriate from the strategic point of view, or helpful to the Government. These discussions are, however, still going ahead in Paris, and we should await their results.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many applications by foreign firms to establish factories in the United Kingdom for motor car electrical accessories have been received and approved in the last three years.

To obtain this information would require exhaustive inquiries in the regions, but the effort and expense would not be justified.

That reply does not sound very satisfactory to me. Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will do what he can to encourage unfettered competition with the powerful monopoly already operating in this field of exorbitant profits by the firm of Messrs. Joseph Lucas, Limited?

It is very nice to hear the voice of unfettered competition coming from the opposite benches.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is in fact a tyrannical near-monopoly in. motor car electrical accessories which foist expensive and often inefficient products on the industry as a whole? Will not the right hon. Gentleman do something to introduce the breath of competition into the motor industry?

Mr. Speaker, I think that the hon. Gentleman hopes to catch your eye next Thursday.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will make a statement on the decision of the South African Government no longer to guarantee the sale of a minimum quantity of gold to the United Kingdom for sterling.

As the South African Minister of Finance announced on 4th February, our two Governments agreed in October last that the special arrangements on gold should come to an end at the end of 1954. Under those arrangements, South Africa undertook to sell to the United Kingdom a minimum guaranteed quantity of 4 million ounces of gold (approximately £50 million) each year; further gold could be earned to the extent that it was not required to defray South Africa's hard currency expenditure, or to maintain her own reserves.

In view of the fact that the South African Government have now withdrawn both the concessions which they made to us in the Agreement of 1950 and 1951, relating to trade on the one hand and gold payments on the other, does the Chancellor still regard South Africa as being within the sterling area?

I think that that is an unnecessarily unfriendly question. South Africa remains a main feature of the sterling area. Her generosity in respect of gold has been quite unrivalled. She has not withdrawn her concession in regard to gold. It was negotiated by myself with Mr. Havenga, the predecessor of the present Minister of Finance, whose friendship with this country is, I think, unrivalled among any statesmen in the world. I would therefore say that the right hon. Gentleman's question is quite unjustified, and that South Africa remains a prominent member of the sterling area.

Is the Chancellor aware that it is no reflection on a country to suggest that it may not be a member of the sterling area? Is he aware that Canada is not a member of the sterling area? Will he indicate in what way our trade and currency arrangements with South Africa differ from those with Canada?

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware that South Africa shares with us in the general meetings which take place of the sterling area Ministers, and that Canada also attends as a dollar member but not a sterling member of the group. As far as I am concerned, our relations with South Africa, in which we are now earning the gold that we need so much, reflect not only upon the great recovery to which Mr. Louw, the new Minister of Finance, has made reference in this country, but also to the great friendship with South Africa in our trade relations one with another.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what dollar stocks, at present owned by Her Majesty's Government, it is proposed to sell; the terms of sale; and what income was received in respect of them during 1954.

With permission I will circulate in the Official Report the list of dollar stocks which have been offered for sale. They are being offered at London market prices. As regards the third part of the Question, the right hon. Member will appreciate that it is not usual to disclose such particulars in respect of assets held by the Exchange Equalisation Account, but he can, of course, be assured that the dollar income will continue to accrue to this country.

Will the Chancellor say why he decided to sell these securities?

I have said in answer to a previous Parliamentary Question that the larger part of these assets will be kept under the control of Her Majesty's Treasury. That was on 3rd February this year. During the right hon. Gentleman's term of office certain sales were effected; that is to say, in 1951, in a reply which the right hon. Gentleman gave, on 3rd July, he indicated that certain sales were being effected. I have found it convenient to permit these sales, and as the dollar results will accrue to the benefit of this country, I think that the right hon. Gentleman may regard it as an entirely satisfactory transaction.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the ground on which I decided that certain sales should be made was that there were very strong arguments on the ground of management? What I was asking, and I ask again, was whether the same conditions apply to the dollar securities which he is now selling.

I am aware of the conditions which the right hon. Gentleman attached to his sales, because I have particulars of them with me—for greater caution. Exactly the same considerations do not apply to these sales, but it has been thought convenient that these sales should take place, leaving the majority of these securities in the control of the Treasury.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give the House some explanation of this? For what reason has he decided to sell the securities, and is the income which the Government lose as a result of that balanced by any increase in sterling income?

The dollar income will accrue to the country, and it is of course possible in the circumstances that those who sell these securities give an equivalent amount of their foreign capital available for similar sales to take place eleswhere. There is nothing very remarkable in 15 million dollars' worth of these sales taking place.

Will the Chancellor please try to give us on some future occasion a statement which is slightly less obscure than the one which he has just made?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, having now examined the Third Report of the Public Accounts Committee, he will make a statement concerning the balance and use of the National Land Fund.

I regret that I am still not in a position to make a statement on these matters.

Will the Chancellor take into account the suggestion that some of this Fund might well be used, as originally intended, for the National Parks Commission?

This is a time of year when I consider all sorts of attractive ideas.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that, if he is not able to tell us anything before the Budget, a statement on the future of the Fund will be incorporated in his Budget statement?

I can give no undertaking whatever about my Budget statement. This is a matter which is obviously under consideration at this time of year.

asked the Chan cellor of the Exchequer in what circum stances voluntary gifts, such as birthday presents, form part of a person's estate for Estate Duty purposes.

Under the general rule a voluntary gift made to an individual within five years of the donor's death attracts Estate Duty in connection with that death. Gifts in consideration of marriage, gifts which formed part of the normal expenditure of the deceased and are reasonable, and absolute gifts which in the case of any one donee do not exceed £500, are excluded from the charge under this rule.

Will the Chancellor bear in mind that, from the correspondence which I have been receiving, it is apparent that there is considerable concern about this matter among those who have been subscribing to the Prime Minister's 80th birthday gift, and will he clarify the position?

So far as I am concerned, the situation is quite clear, but if the hon. Gentleman wishes to send me any of his correspondence, I shall be glad to look at it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to discourage commodity shunting operations, based on transferable sterling, which may threaten the sterling area's gold and dollar reserve.

I keep a close watch on this.

In view of the weakness in the sterling area recently, and the decline in gold reserves since last summer, does not the Chancellor consider that he is taking the matter rather lightly?

No, Sir. I am not taking it lightly at all. It is clear that there is a certain degree of this going on. That is why I said that I am keeping a close watch on it.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House any idea of the extent of the leakage?

I do not think that it is so exaggerated as some people make out. It has results only outside the sterling area and has no relation to our direct exports to the dollar area. It is mostly concerned with European and Continental and other foreign operators, so that it is strictly limited to that area. But there is a certain degree of it going on.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many years he estimates it will take to repay all outstanding claims for post-war credits.

If the present provisions for payment remained unaltered some post-war credit holders would not be able to claim payment of their credits for 35 years or more.