asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that a furnishing stores, of which he has been informed, advertises hire-purchase terms for a dining suite complete; that no deposit is necessary the suite being delivered upon the first of 38 weekly payments of 10s.; that the price is stated to be the same whether cash or credit but that the public is confused as one is 49 guineas and one £19; and if he will therefore investigate the matter upon the evidence supplied to him by the hon. Member for Coventry, South.

I have examined the advertisement to which the hon. Member refers. It is confusing. In fact the weekly payments of 10s. relates to a hire-purchase agreement for two years for which a deposit is necessary, and not to a credit sale agreement for 38 weeks for which no deposit is required, but on which the weekly payments would be much greater.

While I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman agrees that this advertisement of Jay's Furnishing Stores is misleading, may I ask whether he feels able to say that he regards it as completely dishonest and an attempt to muddle the customer? Is he prepared to take steps to stop this abuse in hire-purchase trading?

I will content myself by saying that it is a thoroughly confusing advertisement; but the statute law does not provide for actions in the case of advertisements of that type. Of course, on the hire-purchase agreement the purchaser would be shown the cash price, the hire-purchase price and the amount of each instalment.

Does the right hon. Gentleman contemplate taking action to prevent this undesirable practice?

I have not closed my mind against action to deal with advertisements but that would require legislation, which is not possible at this stage.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that some furniture retailers are quoting to the public cash prices which are falsified for the purpose of disguising the profit made through the sale of furniture on hire-purchase terms; and what steps he proposes to take to stop this abuse of his hire-purchase regulations by certain multiple retailers.

I have seen statements that some furniture retailers inflate their cash prices to make their hire-purchase terms appear more attractive. People can compare the cash and hire-purchase prices charged by different traders and buy where they get the best value for their money. I do not propose to control prices, and no question of contravention of the Hire-Purchase Control Orders arises.

Is the President aware that I am glad that he is learning about this scandal? May I ask him if he is also aware that I am not asking him to control prices? Further, is he aware that a lecture was given recently by Mr. James Beattie to the Council of Industrial Design—and we subsidise the Council of Industrial Design—to the effect that what the Question asserts is true, and Mr. Beattie himself said that he has seen displayed on articles hire-purchase terms that bear no relation to the cash price? Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that he should stop this practice, because we have given him all the examples we can—three a week?

We cannot really control the cash price which people quote, except by price control, but if they inflate their cash prices, they will be beaten by their competitors.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the great growth of this practice is causing a great deal of anxiety to reputable traders, who dislike it as much as does anybody else?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the very large retail organisation which controls a very large part of the trade is bringing pressure to bear on suppliers not to supply independent retail traders who display fair cash prices?

asked the President of the Board of Trade the total number of visitors to the United Kingdom in the current period, including visitors from Commonwealth and Colonial countries; and the total estimated revenue from this source.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer which I gave on 3rd November to my hon. Friend the Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser). The total estimated revenue for April to September this year is £78 million.

Can the Minister supplement that Answer by stating the total amount of currency taken out of the country by people who spent their holidays abroad?

Not for 1955, but for 1954 the best estimate I can make is that we spent £6 million more than overseas visitors spent when coming to this Country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the effect of the Australian and New Zealand imports cuts on the sale of British motor cars; and what representations he has made to the authorities concerned.

Yes, Sir; I regret that Australia and New Zealand have had to impose these cuts on their imports from all sources, but they were unavoidable and it would not be appropriate to make representations against the measures taken. I hope that our motor car manufacturers will be successful in making good the loss by exports to other countries.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that the motor industry is now trapped between these restrictions abroad and the Chancellor's impositions at home? In view of the anxiety about employment in Coventry, will not the right hon. Gentleman take further action to open the channels of trade?

I think that the action taken by Australia and New Zealand in an all-round cut in imports was, unfortunately, necessary, not only in their own interests, but in those of the sterling area as a whole. I understand that the motor industry is successfully filling the gap by expanding exports to other markets.

Is it true that Australia has made a cut all round? Has she cut dollar imports as well?

Australia deals with dollar imports rather separately and more restrictively.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what reply was received from the State Department to the written representations made by Sir Robert Scott, the British Minister in Washington, about the tenders for the Chief Joseph Dam.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has any further statement to make about the rejection by the United States Government of a lowest tender for an electrical undertaking submitted by a United Kingdom firm.

The State Department defended the action taken on the ground that the contract was to be carried out in the United States in an area of substantial unemployment. The reply also stated that the decision did not represent a departure from the principles laid down in the President's executive order of December, 1954, or from the declared objectives of the United States Government to pursue a liberal foreign trade policy. I do not consider that any useful purpose would be served by replying further to the United States note.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since the tender was rejected, the United States has increased the import duties on British bicycles and has recently increased the duty also on underground pipes? Does this not make nonsense of America's promise to liberalise trade, and is it not making greater nonsense of the Chancellor's policy of "Trade, not aid"?

I have made quite clear what my view is about these various actions by the United States. Indeed, they have come under considerable criticism from newspapers in their own country.

Is the President of the Board of Trade in a position to make any statement about reports that the British Embassy has made further representations about the rejection of another lowest tender by the same firm as quoted for the Chief Joseph Dam?

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will put that question down.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will request the Cinematograph Films Council to carry out a national survey of the British film industry's resources, with a view to advising him on future prospects of raising the quotas for British films and of saving dollars on imports.

The possibility of a survey of the British film industry is under consideration at the present time in view of the approaching expiry of the British film quota legislation.

While thanking the Minister for that reply, which is welcome in view of his previous negative Answers, may I ask him if he can possibly speed up this inquiry in view of the continuing decline in the physical assets of the British film industry? Is it not important that this survey should take place as quickly as possible, so that the right hon. Gentleman can decide on the action to arrest the decline?

I think it is good to realise that we happen to be at one on this particular issue for once. I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the necessary inquiry, if it is held, will be held in good time before the quota arrangement runs out.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the necessity to conserve foreign currency, he will reconsider the decision to close down the Government flax processing mills.

No, Sir. I am satisfied that in the interests of economy the Home Flax Scheme ought to be wound up.

Is the Minister aware that this industry employs about 10,000 workers and has a large amount of capital invested in it? Has he received a memorandum from the Flax Spinners' and Manufacturers' Association, which sets out many logical reasons why this industry, one-third of which contributes to our export trade, should be continued?

I have considered a very large number of representations about this matter, and I announced the winding-up of this scheme more than a year ago. It was losing £300 per ton, and I am quite certain that, in the interests of public economy, it ought to be closed.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the flax factory at Flitcham in Norfolk, which is the pioneer factory and the one which carries all the technical staff of this industry, is probably, standing on its own, quite an economic proposition? Will my right hon. Friend reconsider the matter in regard to that particular factory?

This matter was gone into in very great detail. I shall be happy to hear anything which my hon. and gallant Friend wishes to say to me, but this scheme as a whole was losing very considerable sums of public money.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he is taking to ensure an adequate exhibition of exportable British goods at the industrial fair now in progress in New Delhi.

Exhibiting goods in overseas trade fairs is a matter for individual firms and not the Government. The Board of Trade drew the attention of industry to the Indian Industries Fair by a variety of means from last November onwards, and a number of British firms are exhibiting.

Is the Minister aware that a number of reputable people in Delhi have described the British part of the exhibition as the shoddiest part of the fair, and that, in the early reports in papers like the "Hindustan Times," there was scarcely any mention of the British part of the exhibition at all, while there was considerable mention of the American, Chinese and Soviet Union exhibits? Is not that deplorable in a country of the Commonwealth, and should not the President of the Board of Trade take some responsibility for promoting exports through these means?

These questions about fairs are always difficult matters, but I am bound to say that I think it is for the industrialists to judge what they wish to exhibit. The industrialist's object is not necessarily national prestige but to sell his goods, and that is why he sends them there. I do not think that to repeat every criticism of British goods helps our export trade.

In spite of what my right hon. Friends says, is he aware that, while the cold war conditions exist, he cannot really wholly neglect the element of national prestige?

If I may say so, that is quite a different, though important, point. If we are, as a matter of foreign policy and national prestige, to have national exhibits, that is quite a different question from the one with which we are dealing here.

While accepting the President's view that, from the strictly commercial point of view, the British businessman does not need to exhibit there, surely he will bear in mind the fact that Asia is a developing part of the world and that, on the long-term view, we ought to develop our trade, in the interests of the country?

I am concerned with answering on the commercial aspect, which is the responsibility of my Department.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the exaggerated claims which are being made that flat-finish cotton fabrics require no ironing; and what steps he proposes to take under Section 2 (1) (d) reference Section 3 (1) (a) (b) of the Merchandise Marks Acts to ensure that these claims are stopped.

I am aware of the claim that certain cotton fabrics do not require ironing. I have no evidence that this claim is unjustified, but if the hon. Member will let me have any such evidence, I shall be glad to consider it.

I shall be delighted to do so, but may I ask the right hon. Gentleman, as a preliminary, whether his office has called his attention to a statement made by the President of the Textile Finishing Trades Association in "Men's Wear" of 22nd October that there is a tendency nowadays to exaggerate claims for particular fabrics? What is the use of having a Merchandise Marks Act, which allows action to be taken in the case of false claims, if the right hon. Gentleman has not the slightest intention of using it?

I have no evidence that these claims are unjustified. When we find that the cotton industry, which is fighting considerable odds, is developing new forms of fabrics and processing, it deserves all the support it can get.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will consider appointing a committee to go into the whole question of overseas trade exhibitions.

Such a committee already exists. The Exhibitions Advisory Committee was appointed in 1949, and is widely representative of industry and commerce. The general question of our policy regarding overseas trade exhibitions has been thoroughly considered by them in the last twelve months, and the Government's current practice in this matter, as recently set out in the "Board of Trade Journal," takes full account of the Committee's advice.

Is it not a fact that this Advisory Council arose out of the 1946 Ramsden Committee, and that things have changed since then, so that the matter ought to be looked at again? As we have heard, in reply to a recent Question, something about an exhibition at New Delhi, should there not be consultation with the Foreign Office to see whether exhibitions cannot be dealt with nationally, and, for that reason, will not a new committee be required?

I think we should never take up an inflexible attitude about matters as complicated as trade fairs. This is a very representative Advisory Committee, with the trade unions and all walks of life in industry represented, and I am bound to say that on the commercial side I consider that I am well advised to take their advice in these matters.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the fact that trade fairs are not the only answer to our trade problems, but that we need first-class salesmen, backed up by an efficient service at home?

I agree with my hon. and gallant Friend, and I recognise that that view is very strongly held in British industrial circles today.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is satisfied so far with the results of the Anglo-Polish Trade Agreement of November, 1954; how much trade has resulted from it; and to what extent the credit facilities provided have been used.

No, Sir. A number of the Polish quotas remain unfulfilled. We have expressed our dissatisfaction to the Polish authorities and are pressing them to carry out their part of the Agreement. As regards the last part of the Question, exporters have availed themselves of the facilities provided by the Export Credits Guarantee Department to the extent of about one-fifth of our total exports to Poland.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if I am to understand from his Answer that the fault is on the Polish side and not on the British exporters' side? Is there any hope of extending credit facilities to Poland similar to those afforded by Western Germany, France, Austria and other Western Powers in the past?

The fault is certainly on the Polish side, in so far as their quotas remain unfulfilled. In the Export Credits Guarantee Department, we are covering in the normal way, and as far as I know there is no discrimination here.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the policy of Her Majesty's Government in regard to the import of agricultural raw materials.

If, as I understand, my hon. Friend has animal feeding-stuffs in mind, the majority of these may be imported without restriction from all sources.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is a certain amount of apprehension among agriculturists, in view of the statement made by the Minister of Agriculture that we want to increase our livestock and that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that we must keep an eye on the amount of coarse grains imported? If we want an expanding livestock industry, we must have ample supplies of coarse grains.

We believe that it is in the national interest to have these raw material feeding stuffs available from all sources in such a way that we are likely to buy them in the cheapest market.

Is there no intention at all of restricting private importers from importing as much coarse grains as they wish?

We certainly do not want to stand between farmers and the import of their necessary raw materials.

Then how is it that Ministers are constantly stating that we must reduce the imports of coarse grains?

It is not the intention of the Government to try to solve our current economic difficulties by the reimposition of import restrictions in matters of this kind.

What is the dollar expenditure?

I cannot give that figure without notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that our exports to Canada over the last three years have been roughly half the value of our imports; what steps he is taking to stimulate our sales to Canada; and if he is satisfied that he has made it clear to the Canadian Government that the continuity of trade at its present level must depend upon an effort on their part to encourage British imports by all means at their disposal.

Yes, Sir. The principal obstacle to exports in recent months has been a condition of inflation in the home market, and a variety of steps have now been taken, as the House knows, to remedy the situation. I can say with confidence that the Canadian Government recognise the importance to Canada of the United Kingdom's efforts to increase its dollar exports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to receive the Report of the Monopolies Commission on the supply of pneumatic tyres.

I have already received this Report and I expect to lay it before Parliament early next month.

Has the President of the Board of Trade seen newspaper reports that he is under pressure to cut out various parts of this Report? Will he give an assurance that he will not cut out anything on the ground of its possibly being against the interests of the tyre manufacturers?

I have seen those reports, and I have had representations made to me by the tyre manufacturers asking me to excise certain parts of the Report. What I have to consider is whether it is necessary to excise those parts on grounds of national interest. The statute requires me to consider that, and that I will certainly consider.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the difficulties caused to local authorities by repeated changes in the rates charged by the Public Works Loan Board for the money lent to local authorities; what steps he is proposing to meet these difficulties; and whether he will give an assurance that such uncertainty will be avoided in future so that local finances may have reasonable stability.

I have nothing to add to my right hon. Friend's Budget statement on 26th October, in which he stated that day-to-day fluctuations will be avoided, but that the Treasury will continue to adjust local loans rates in either direction as may be required to keep them in line with future changes in the level of the relevant rates in the market.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that his right hon. Friend's too frequent tinkering with the Bank Rate and the rate of interest on loans to local authorities has caused confusion and caused them to abandon major schemes? Will he give an undertaking that if he must apply this Keynesian technique, he will do so in such a way that a reasonable period of time is given for the operation of the Bank Rate at a certain level?

I certainly agree that day-by-day fluctuations, as my right hon. Friend said, are undesirable, but the general principle under which these rates must fluctuate with changes in market rates was stated in the House by Sir Stafford Cripps.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that local authorities are already controlled by the Government in that they need permission for all their activities? Why is it necessary to penalise them by making them pay these extra charges and interest when they are already under control? Would the right hon. Gentleman further state who gets the money which local authorities pay in the extra charges? Who benefits when the local authorities part with the money? It goes somewhere.

There is no penalising of the local authorities. The right hon. Member for East Stirlingshire (Mr. Woodburn) is asking that the local authorities should be put in a privileged position and alone be insulated from changes in money rates.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been called to the delay in the clearance of air freight at London Airport occasioned by the refusal of the Customs to operate at night and over weekends; and what steps he is taking to enable the airlines to deal expeditiously with freight.

I am not aware of any delay in the clearance of freight at London Airport attributable to the lack of Customs facilities. Customs procedures have already been adapted to facilitate the clearance of air freight, and officers are available at all times to deal with really urgent traffic.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that that statement is at variance with that expressed by British European Airways? Will he make further inquiries?

I made extensive inquiries before answering this Question, but if my hon. Friend can give me any particular case of alleged delay, I will look into it. However, my information is that, in general, people using the airport are very satisfied.

Is the Financial Secretary also aware of allegations that there is greater delay in clearing freight for the British Corporation than for the American concerns for certain stated reasons, and that there are a number of known cases in which long-term freight contracts have been moved from the Corporation to American concerns, simply because they are cleared through the Customs more quickly?

I cannot believe that there is anything in the allegation, but I will certainly examine any information which the hon. Member cares to send to me.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that small firms approaching finance corporations for fresh industrial capital are finding increasing difficulties placed in their way following the instructions given by the Treasury in relation to the current credit squeeze; and whether, in view of the fact that this is resulting in the abandonment of a number of promising projects of value to this country's industrial future, he will review the situation and take remedial action at an early date.

The policy of the Government is directed to slowing down the tempo of investment which is not of the greatest national urgency. My right hon. Friend is aware that in consequence some useful projects may have to be postponed, but regrets that this is unavoidable in present circumstances.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many small companies use hire-purchase finance companies to enable them to buy plant and machinery? I have in mind an instance of a purchaser of a diesel tug. Is he also satisfied that the Industrial and Commercial Finance Corporation is sufficiently financed to meet the needs of small companies?

I made a full statement on the whole of this subject in an Adjournment debate on 28th July in response to the hon. Member for Wednesbury (Mr. S. N. Evans), and I have nothing to add to what I then said.

Is the Economic Secretary aware that agriculture, from which his hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Mr. Gresham Cooke) wants to take £10 million, is also having difficulty with the credit squeeze?

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture recently made a public speech about this in which he explained the position quite clearly.

Is the Economic Secretary aware that this policy will lead to the squeezing out of many small firms? Is that now the avowed policy of the Tory Party?

Again, I would advise the right hon. Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) to look at what I said on 28th July. We debated this matter at some length on that day.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give an estimate of the cost of allowing tuition fees at independent schools and colleges to rank for Income Tax relief.

About £10 to £12 million a year.

Will my right hon. Friend represent to the Chancellor the very great advantage to the nation of facilitating education of this kind, and also the equity and fairness of helping those who try to help themselves?

This is a matter to which my right hon. Friend has promised that he would give consideration, but there is nothing that I can add to that today.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that the amount involved is insignificant compared with the scandal of perpetuating a class system of education at the expense of the Exchequer?

It is a very good thing that those parents who wish to make sacrifices for their children's schooling should be enabled so to do.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the labour cost per unit of output today compares with that of five years ago.

Between 1950 and 1954 labour costs per unit of industrial output increased by 23 per cent., and the evidence available indicates that they have continued to rise during this year.

Can my hon. Friend say what are the main reasons why this has come about, and how badly it affects our export position?

I shall not give a short answer to that today, because this is really a subject which we could consider more profitably at length in a debate.

Is not one of the causes the fact that the £ today is worth only 17s. 3d. compared with when the Conservatives took office?

The real standard of living for the wage earners has increased under the present Government, whereas, as the right hon. Gentleman knows, it fell during the last four years of the Labour Government.

Does not the Economic Secretary agree that the figure which he has given is based on completely "phoney" statistics which do not take into account the increases in the general price level in the period in question? Will he give the corrected figure based on the value of the output and not merely on the quantity?

I have no doubt that the official figures on which this answer is based are much more accurate than any statistics which the hon. Member himself has.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can now give an estimate of the injury done to the country by the dock strike.

I cannot put this into figures. The setback to our trade came at an unfortunate time, though great efforts have been made to reduce the damage to a minimum.

Would it not be a good thing if somebody were to estimate the damage which such a strike does, so that we can take necessary action?

These are difficult things to estimate precisely, but we should remember, amongst other things, that ours is not the only country where there have been strikes.

Can the hon. Gentleman offer any more reliable statistics as to how far the manipulations of the money changers in this and other countries have affected the value of the £?

That is an absolutely different point, and quite irrelevant to this Question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the extent of the existing liaison between Customs preventive officers and officers of the Royal Ulster Constabulary for the purpose of the prevention and detection of smuggling offences in Northern Ireland.

The Customs and the police have separate and distinct responsibilities on the Border. The two services work in close co-operation when necessary.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will arrange for the baggage of passengers travelling to and arriving from abroad to be examined by Customs officers on international boat trains while the trains are in transit between London and the ports of departure and arrival.

Suggestions on these lines have previously been examined by the Customs and railway authorities and others concerned with passenger traffic. But the conclusion which has on each occasion been reached is that, in the circumstances existing in this country, it would not be consistent with the convenience of passengers, with economy in staff, or with effective Customs control.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this practice works very well on the Continent, and on the trains between Belfast and Dublin? In view of the undoubted convenience to passengers which would result, will he not reconsider this matter?

I can assure my hon. Friend that it has been most carefully considered. The train journey between the Channel ports and London is certainly shorter than the corresponding journeys on the other side of the Channel, and also the trains tend to be crowded.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been drawn to the account 1954–55 of the National Land Fund, which shows that the only payment made was £2,500 for a set of banners associated with Sir Francis Drake; and if he is now in a position to make a statement about the future use of the Fund, which has now reached nearly £58 million.

The Answer to the first part of the Question is "Yes, Sir"; and to the second part "No, Sir."

Is the Financial Secretary aware that, in the sad history of this Fund—which was set up for the most admirable purposes—last year was the most pathetic year of all? Is he further aware that this consideration by the Government has been going on for nearly a year, and can he say when his right hon. Friend will be able to make a statement?

I quite agree that the size of the Fund has proved to be excessive in relation to its statutory purpose. I cannot say how soon my right hon. Friend will be able to make a statement.

Could we be enlightened as to the association of Sir Francis Drake with the Land Fund?

Will not the Financial Secretary take account of the strong feeling there is, on both sides of the House, that this Fund should be used, as originally intended, to help to establish national parks?

In answer to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell), eight sixteenth century banners, traditionally associated with Sir Francis Drake and the "Golden Hind," were accepted in satisfaction of death duties. The answer to the hon. Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East (Mr. Blenkinsop) is that it is quite true that, when this Fund was first introduced, the right hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Dalton) suggested that it might be useful when national parks legislation came along, but when that legislation did come along, the Labour Government did not finance it by the use of this Fund.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent representations he has received urging the payment of interest on post-war credits; and his reply.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answers given to my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, Central (Sir F. Medlicott) on 23rd June, to the hon. Member for Dunbartonshire, East (Mr. Bence) on 3rd November, and to the hon. Member for Feltham (Mr. Hunter) on 8th November. The matter has been raised with my right hon. Friend occasionally by other hon. Members in correspondence.

But is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that during the General Election, the Secretary of State for Scotland, amongst others, gave a specific pledge that he would raise this matter with the Chancellor? We should like to know whether or not that has been done.

Three Questions, at least, have been answered in this House since then, and, in reply, the Chancellor and I have pointed out that to pay interest on post-war credits at 2½ cent. would cost £131½ million. At 3½ per cent. the cost would be £19 million. I apologise to the House for having said, the other day, on the spur of the moment, that the cost would be £16 million or £17 million. The position remains, and I think this is supported by most hon. Members, that if the additional money were available it would be better to use it to pay out postwar credits more quickly.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will issue cash vouchers in lieu of tobacco vouchers, to old-age pensioners who do not smoke.

No, Sir. The sole purpose of the tobacco token scheme is to relieve old-age pensioners of some part of the post-war increases in Tobacco Duty, and for that reason it would not be appropriate to extend the scheme to non-smokers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that not all old people—ladies especially—smoke and that those who have a sweet tooth cannot afford to eat sweets at the present prices? Will he please ask the Chancellor to consider the matter again? The amount involved would be very small.

This matter has been raised in the past. We are simply continuing the action that was taken by the hon. Gentleman's own party, when the Tobacco Duty was raised and it was felt desirable to protect old-age pensioners against some part of the increase in the duty.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that, human nature being what it is, the undoubted abuses of this scheme can only be checked by some such system as is proposed, or by withdrawal of the privilege?

I should not like to dog-matise about human nature, but I am glad to say that the abuses of this scheme are not as extensive as, perhaps, my hon. Friend has alleged.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will exempt amateur operatic and dramatic societies in Northern Ireland from the payment of Purchase Tax and Customs duties in respect of the temporary importation of theatrical costumes and other stage properties from the Irish Republic.

The exemption suggested by my hon. Friend would unfairly discriminate against the theatrical costumiers in the United Kingdom, who have to pay Purchase Tax and, where appropriate, Customs duty on the costumes and properties which they let out on hire.

Would my right hon. Friend accept an assurance from me that these properties and costumes are imported not to portray stage Irishmen but for the advancement of culture and dramatic art in Northern Ireland?

I feel sure that that is so, and we want to help in every way we can in advancing the culture of Northern Ireland, but were my hon. Friend's suggestion to be adopted, it would really create an anomaly.

Can the Financial Secretary not accept something in the nature of a bond or guarantee for the return of the properties after use?

I will naturally examine any proposal which my hon. Friend makes, but I do not think that it will be possible to work it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what conversations he has had with the United States Government over the possibility of a higher price for gold; and with what result.

My right hon. Friend stated the view of Her Majesty's Government on this question in his speech to the Annual Meeting of the International Monetary Fund at Istanbul, in which he said:

"Provided that we choose the right moment, an increase in the value of existing gold reserves would make it easier for the world to ensure that temporary balance of payments fluctuations are dealt with without recourse to restrictive measures."

May we take it from that reply that it is Government policy to press for an increase in the price of gold, presumably in the interests of the sterling area and the balance of payments; and as the United States of America are the main people concerned, should not this matter be taken up directly with them?

When the hon. Member reads my Answer, I think that he will be satisfied with the line which the Chancellor took. I will gladly send the hon. Member a copy of the whole speech if he would like to see it. On the second point, it is important to remember that an increase in the United States monetary price of gold can only be effected by a decision of the United States itself, but we have made our position quite clear.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has completed his review of the hardships caused to retired civil servants, local government staff, and teachers, by the rise in the cost of living; and whether he will now introduce a Pensions (Increase) Bill to benefit those whose fixed pensions have steadily declined in value.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply I gave on 27th October to the hon. Member for Cardiff, West (Mr. G. Thomas).

Is the Minister aware that most of the very old pensioners in these groups got nothing under the 1952 Act, and that their last increase was given by the 1947 Act, since when the cost of living has increased by 50 per cent.? In view of the sympathy expressed by both sides of the House—and by the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself last June—does the right hon. Gentleman not think that it is about time something was done for these deserving people?

I should like to repeat my statement of 27th October, that the Government are undertaking a review of these matters and will announce their conclusions in due course.

As it is extremely difficult to get figures, will my right hon. Friend circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT what it would cost to bring up the pensions of all the pensioners covered by the Pensions (Increase) Acts to the figure of the pension now being paid as from 1st January, 1955? Further, if the figures are not available, how is my right hon. Friend able to consider a fresh Pensions (Increase) Bill? I think that there is something very odd about it all.

If I remember correctly, the answer to my hon. Friend's question is between £20 and £25 million a year. If she wishes to have a more exact figure, perhaps she would put a Question down, but I think it would be more helpful if those of us who are working on these complicated subjects were given the opportunity of examining the figures further rather than have to work out additional figures for the House.

On a point of order. As the Minister of Education told one of my hon. Friends last week that the figures in relation to teachers were not available, how is it the Treasury were able to produce the figures?

That is not a point of order.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will now sell the Government holding in the British Petroleum Company.

No, Sir.

If the Government intend to retain their holding, will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider the position of their directors, who represent the majority holding in the company, and who, I understand, do not take part in the ordinary decisions of the company, with resultant embarrassment caused to the Government when a dividend decision such as that of the week before last is taken? Should these directors not take a full share in such decisions?

I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend said to the hon. Member on 1st March, 1955—that it has riot been our practice to interfere with the commercial management of the company.

Is the hon. Member aware that everyone will applaud his decision not to undo the good work done by the right hon. Member for Woodford (Sir W. Churchill) as far back as 1911 in putting Government money into this concern; but is it not a fact that in modern conditions it is essential that we should take a more positive part in the direction of this company?

I cannot add to what I have just said.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what consultations the British Government directors of the British Petroleum Company had with him on dividend policy, prior to that company substantially increasing its interim dividend the day after his supplementary Budget.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply by my right hon. Friend the then Economic Secretary to the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Beswick) on 27th November, 1952.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that it was most unfortunate timing to increase this dividend the day after the Chancellor of the Exchequer made an appeal for restraint? Secondly, what is the use of having Government directors in this company if they perform no function?

I have made it quite plain, in my earlier Answer to the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond), that the Government do not take an active part in these decisions. In answer to the first part of my hon. Friend's question, I would remind him of what the chairman of the company announced in December, 1954, namely, the company's intention in future to make any interim dividend payment larger in relation to the expected total payment than has been the case in the exceptional circumstances of recent years. I suggest that in the light of this statement we should suspend judgment until the total distribution over the year is made.

In view of the fact that the Chancellor made his appeal only the day before the announcement, was it not most unfortunate timing?

I have answered that point and I have nothing more to say.

Will the Economic Secretary answer the latter point in his hon. Friend's question—the part which the Government directors play? Is it the case that the Government directors are not supposed to take part in the commercial and financial affairs of the undertaking? If so, does not that reduce their appointment to something in the nature of a sinecure—something in the nature of giving them jobs and substantial salaries without responsibility?

The arrangements have been exactly the same ever since 26th March, 1929, which is a very long time ago. I would make two comments to the right hon. Gentleman. First, as my right hon. Friend said on 1st March, 1955, it has not been our practice to interfere with the commercial management of the company. Secondly, as my predecessor said, on 27th November, 1952:

"I regret that I cannot disclose information about communications which pass between Her Majesty's Government and their representatives."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th November, 1952; Vol. 508, c. 610.]

The hon. Member still has not answered the question. Never mind how long the arrangement has lasted. Is it understood, as between the Government and the Government directors, that they do not take an active part in the commercial and financial operations of the company? If it is so, then are not these appointments in the nature of sinecures, and objectionable?

I think that I have made the position perfectly clear to the House, and I have nothing to add to what I said.

I am entitled to an answer to the Question. Why is the hon. Gentleman so evasive? Is it understood that they have active commercial and financial duties or not? If not, are not the appointments in the nature of sinecures for material award?

I have told the House many times that the position has been exactly the same since 1929, and I have nothing to add to that.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the interim dividend recently announced by British Petroleum, a company in which Her Majesty's Government has a controlling interest, was eight times as much as the previous interim dividend; and whether, in view of the inflationary nature of such increases, he will reconsider the Government's policy not normally to interfere with the commercial operations of this company.

The answer to the first part of the Question is "Yes, Sir"; and to the second part, "No, Sir."

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this tremendous dividend—quite unprecedented since 1929—was declared the day after the Chancellor made his Budget Statement, that it made nonsense of his appeal for dividend restraint, and, in the eyes of the workers, is a positive incitement to wage demands? Will the Government therefore reconsider their policy in regard to a company in which they own the majority interest?

I can only repeat what I said to my hon. Friend the Member for Louth (Mr. Osborne) just now, that in the light of the statement made at the meeting of the company in December, 1954, we should suspend judgment until the total distribution for this year is known.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that teachers who cut big sheets of school paper into smaller sheets for their pupils are breaking Purchase Tax rules and have been warned that if they cut up sheets of more than 229½ square inches education committees become liable for tax on the smaller sheets; and whether he will end this tax anomaly.

The position is governed by the general provisions of the law relating to processing, which are necessary for the effective collection of the tax. I have no reason to believe that they cause any serious embarrassment to the educational authorities concerned.

Does that mean that the hon. Member is not prepared to consider the proposal put before him by the National Union of Teachers? Is he suggesting that the schools should have bigger desks so that they can use these huge sheets of paper?

I think the matter arose out of some misunderstanding. I know that a local education authority issued a circular to head teachers in a certain area instructing them not to have very large sheets cut up in case that imposed on the education authority the necessity for registration. Frankly, I think the question is hypothetical, and I have no knowledge of any school being inconvenienced in this matter.

Is it right that education should be hampered by the law being an ass in this matter? If the law is wrong why should it not be put right?

The law is not an ass, and there is no evidence of education or any school being inconvenienced in any way.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory reply, I propose to raise this matter at a convenient time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the water bottles made of metal which are used by coal miners fall within the range of articles which will bear a Purchase Tax of 30 per cent.

No, Sir.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer which kinds of dustbin will be subject to Purchase Tax under his Budget proposals.

All dustbins of a kind used for domestic purposes.

Is the Minister aware that dustbins—the most obvious of necessities, and previously free of tax—will now bear a Purchase Tax of 9s. 10d., raising the price from 26s. 3d. to 36s. 1d., which will cost people in Salford £3,000 a year extra and in larger cities larger sums?

I could not accept the view that it is impossible to buy a dustbin for less than 26s. 3d.—although I do not know about Salford—but these matters will be capable of further debate during the Committee stage of the Finance Bill.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will now favourably consider a fresh issue of National Savings Certificates and/or higher interest rates for Post Office Savings, to bring them more in line with present money rates and so, by the encouragement of thrift, combat inflation in the most effective manner.

We are all agreed that National Savings should be encouraged; and while I do not think that the measures suggested by my hon. Friend would be the best way, my right hon. Friend has recently approved the introduction of a new issue of Defence Bonds bearing interest at 4 per cent. and the raising of the limit on holdings of National Savings Certificates from 1,000 to 1,200 units.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him to take into account that over the last ten years the increase in the value of National Savings Certificates has been offset by the fall in the purchasing power of the £? Does he not think that the time has come to offer greater inducements to small savers to invest in Savings Certificates?

I attach very great importance to keeping up the sales of Savings Certificates, but those sales are going reasonably well at present and I am certainly not advised that they would be accelerated by a new issue on more favourable terms.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the shortage of shilling pieces, he will instruct the Mint to produce substantially greater quantities.

I understand that the Mint's stock of shillings are sufficient to meet all requirements reported to it by the banks. Since the beginning of 1953 the Mint has struck over 160 million shillings.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there seems to be a chronic shortage of shillings for gas and electricity meters? Will he consider the position which will arise if and when parking meters are introduced, too?

Many of us are short of shillings and sixpences from time to time, but the arrangement is that the Mint responds to requests which it receives from the head offices of the banks, and if there is a shortage in any area all that needs to be done is for the banks to set the machinery in motion.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the final deficit in United Kingdom current transactions with the dollar area during the twelve months ended 30Th June, 1955, excluding defence aid.

I would refer the hon. Member to Command 9585 Tables 6 and 8, item 15, for the latest estimates.

Since the Treasury will not do the addition sum for me, would I be right in saying that the amount of this dollar gap is something like £250 million? In the light of that, will the Government get away from its doctrinaire, free market notions and begin to put forward real measures for closing the gap?

The answer to the second part of the Question is "No, Sir, certainly not". The answer to the first part is that the current balance, including defence aid, is not minus £250 million, but minus £191 million.

Are we to understand from the statement of the Economic Secretary that the Government will take no steps to close the gap, because that is what he said?

No, but that we will not go back to the war-time economy of physical controls.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of gold and dollars lost in transactions with the countries of the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation during the twelve months ended 30th June, 1955, by the sterling area as a whole and by the United Kingdom alone.

For the sterling area as a whole I would refer the hon. Member for the latest estimates to Command 9585, where he will find them most conveniently set out in Table 9. It is not possible to allot these gold and dollar payments to the United Kingdom and the rest of the sterling area respectively.

As, so far as I can make out, the figure appears to be somewhere very near the total loss of our gold and dollars for the period in question, can the hon. Gentleman explain why the Government agreed this year to increase to 75 per cent. the amount of our E.P.U. deficit which we settle in gold and dollars, and thus add further to the drain on our reserves?

We believe in the principle of moving to a freer system of trade and payments. I have said that many times in this House, and I stand by that.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much the Treasury has given to the cost of building a national theatre; to what purpose the grant made has been put; and what progress has been made towards the construction of this theatre.

It has not yet been possible to authorise a start on this project. No funds, therefore, have been provided.

Will the Financial Secretary bear in mind that the £1 million which was originally voted by this House when the Labour Government were in power in 1949 would by no means be enough now? Can we have an assurance that if the project is commenced additional sums will be made available?

I think that all these matters are hypothetical. At present there is no question of the project being commenced and, meanwhile, we are bound by the 1949 Act.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many paintings by E1 Greco are in the possession of the art galleries of England and Wales which receive direct aid from the Treasury.

Excluding the recently acquired picture known as "The Dream of Philip II," the National Gallery has two pictures catalogued as by E1 Greco. One of these is by many scholars—including the Director—not attributed to El Greco himself. The National Gallery also has two very small pictures catalogued as from E1 Greco's studio.