asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the entertainments tax is causing damage to the live theatre, increasing unemployment in various aspects of that industry and interfering prejudicially with the culture of which the live theatre is an exponent; and if, therefore, he will now take steps to abolish or reduce that tax on the live theatre.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware of the financial help received by the theatrical companies which are exempt from entertainments tax, and thus receive the whole of the tax equivalent; and whether he will now extend this exemption to the live theatre as a whole.

My right hon. Friend has received representations from the interests concerned with the live theatre. Theatrical companies whose productions satisfy the appropriate statutory conditions are already exempted from Entertainments Duty, and receive considerable assistance thereby. For the reasons given in his recent Budget speech, however, he regrets that he cannot introduce any further remission of Entertainments Duty at present.

Does not the Chancellor of the Exchequer realise that by that refusal he is sentencing thousands of artists to unemployment and inflicting capital punishment upon a very vital aspect of British culture, and reaping no comparable reward? Will he reconsider it?

The returns available to me do not show any falling off in employment in recent years. My right hon. Friend feels strongly that this would not be an appropriate moment for a remission of taxation in the direction of entertainments, however deserving.

Does the hon. Gentleman think it fair for this House not to pay Entertainments Duty after last night's show, especially as the Government succeeded in losing their own Bill?

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm what I think he stated just now, that practically all the repertory companies in the country benefit from the present situation?

Yes, Sir, that is certainly so. Much the greater part of the tax is paid by variety and music hall shows.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the estimated total expenditure during the latest period of 12 months for which information is available incurred by the Government in the administration and collection of Purchase Tax.

Purchase Tax work is largely done by the staff of the Customs and Excise Department in conjunction with their other responsibilities for collecting the Customs and Excise revenue. Separate figures for the total expenditure incurred in administering and collecting Purchase Tax are, therefore, not available.

While I regret that the figures are not available, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he agrees that if the expenditure referred to in the Question were added to the expenditure incurrd by manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers in calculating and collecting the tax, the total would amount to a very considerable sum?

The Customs and Excise revenue, of course, amounts to a very considerable sum. The average cost of collecting the revenue is about three-quarters of 1 per cent. of the revenue collected.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the increase in consumers' expenditure on food between October, 1951, and the latest available date; and how much of the increased expenditure, as compared with 1951 prices, was due to an increase in the volume of consumption and how much to the increase in prices.

Estimates of consumers' expenditure on food are available only for quarterly periods, and because of seasonal variations comparisons can properly be made only for comparable quarters. Between the second quarter of 1951 and the second quarter of 1955, the latest for which figures are available, consumers' expenditure on food is estimated to have increased from £739 million to £1,032 million, or by 40 per cent. The increase in volume of consumption was about 9 per cent., while prices rose about 28 per cent.

Does the Economic Secretary realise that his answer contains the Government's problem in relation to the trade unions, and that this is the justification for the wage increases which are now being pursued by the trade unions? Does he not think he ought to do something to stabilise prices?

I really think that an increase in the volume of consumption of food by 9 per cent. is not as bad as all that.

As there is now no Finance Bill on the Order Paper, will the hon. Gentleman suggest to his right hon. Friend that he consider the whole question all over again and introduce a new Finance Bill which will deal with the problem revealed by the answer to this Question in relation to prices, instead of aggravating the price rise as proposed in the Finance Bill which we were so lately discussing?

That is another question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give an estimate of the cost to the Treasury of restoring the purchasing power of post-war credits to their 1943 level.

The total of post-war credits now outstanding is estimated at about £529 million. This amount would have to be increased by about £320 million to provide the same amount of purchasing power at 1943 prices. This is based on the Consumer Price Index brought up to date by the Interim Index of Retail Prices.

Can the Minister say how many more months it will take for the additional rise in the cost of living to wipe out completely the relative purchasing power of this money at the rate we are going?

When my right hon. Friend's Budget is enacted it will have very great influence in stabilising the cost of living.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of post-war credits remaining to be repaid for each of the years since the inception of the scheme; and the relative purchasing power of the total amounts for each year, taking the £ as being worth 20s. in the year when the scheme was introduced.

As the reply contains a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Has there been any improvement in the position over the last four years during any period since the Government have been in office, a Government pledged to reduce the cost of living and to make the £ worth something? Can the right hon. Gentleman show any improvement?

I do not quite know what the hon. Member means by "improvement." He has asked for figures for postwar credit years which ran from 1941 to 1946.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what categories, and approximately how many people, are covered by the Government's present reexamination of the position of persons living on fixed incomes; and when he hopes to be able to make a statement on the subject.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the estimated cost, group by group, to bring pensioners covered by the Pensions Increases Acts up to the operative level at 1st January, 1955.

As the reply is lengthy and contains a good many figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I hope to be able to make a statement on the whole subject later this afternoon in answer to another Question.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that these people are the hardest hit by the rise in the cost of living and that it was 29 per cent. for 1947–51 and has been 16 per cent. since?

I suggest that my hon. gallant Friend should await the statement I hope to be able to make.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has yet decided to introduce a new Pensions Increases Bill.

The Government have decided that further measures to assist retired members of the public services are justified and are preparing detailed proposals to put before Parliament in the New Year.

While appreciating the spirit of my right hon. Friend's reply, which will give very great satisfaction, may I ask him whether he is open to receive representations and recommendations and whether it is his intention during the review to consider wiping out anomalies? In fact, is he to have a comprehensive scheme based on the needs of the people of today?

I am certainly ready to receive suggestions and representations. This is an extraordinarily complicated matter, and it will not be until next year that the Government will be able to lay their detailed proposals.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that one of the best ways in which the Government could help the people in these groups is by leaving the Finance Bill where it now is?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that Mr. J. Le Gassicke, The Watermill, Binbrook, Lincoln, while driving at night, accidentally knocked down and killed a fox; that he had the skin cured and dressed for 17s. 6d.; that the skin was valued at 15s. and that he is now asked to pay a 50 per cent. Purchase Tax; and, in view of the fact that he is being asked to pay 7s. 6d. on a purchase he never made, if he will remit the tax.

Under the Finance Act, 1946, any person who by way of business processes raw fur skins becomes liable for tax on the wholesale value of the resulting goods. That is the reason why tax is payable by the processor in this case.

Is this not really absurd, giving pleasure to no one and doing no one any good, except encouraging foxes to run over the roads at night?

It was the Government which the hon. Member supported that found it necessary in 1946 to place a tax on the processing of fur skins because otherwise there was considerable evasion of the tax.

Do not the Financial Secretary and the Chancellor feel great sympathy with foxes and all other hunted creatures?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what new instructions he has sent in the last two or three months to the Capital Issues Committee.

None, Sir. But in the course of his Budget statement on 26th October my right hon. Friend informed the House that the Capital Issues Committee took note of his statement on 25th July on the need to check investment and has applied it in its scrutiny of applications. He added "I take this opportunity to underline with fresh emphasis what I then said, and to make it clear that there can be no question for the time being of the authorities relaxing their critical attitude."

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that as long as this Committee remains in being it should receive some definite directive from the Chancellor as to its part in the credit squeeze? Will he also say whether when local authority applications for loans are put on to the market their issues will have to go through the Capital Issues Committee?

There has been no fresh C.I.C. directive, because it would not have been appropriate to issue a fresh statement on investment priorities especially for the guidance of the C.I.C. Therefore, it was appropriate that the C.I.C. should be told in general terms to be more restrictive at the same time as the banks were told in general terms to reduce the level of advances.

What priorities is the Capital Issues Committee to observe in this matter? Are there previous directives laying down which applications are to be given priority and which are to be put at the end of the queue?

There was some doubt as to how far the C.I.C. could go without asking for specific guidance, but I assure the right hon. Gentleman that in practice it manages to do its work without specific guidance by using its judgment on the merits of individual applications.

How does it discriminate between applications, and if it does not, how does it cut down the amount of borrowing?

That is for the C.I.C. to say, but it has managed in practice to do its work by using its judgment in individual cases.

Since my hon. Friend has referred to a statement extant as to the investment priorities, would he look into the possibility of publishing a White Paper, at about the same time as the Economic Survey, on such investment priorities, including the operations of the Capital Issues Committee, so that the House can have some knowledge of what the priorities are and possibly debate the matter?

That raises wider issues, but I remind my noble Friend of what my right hon. Friend said in his statement on 25th July—that this policy was being left to the banks to pursue themselves.

Does not the hon. Gentleman's answer mean that the Government have now abdicated any decision on what part of the investment programme is to go on and what is to be delegated into the hands of the Capital Issues Committee to which they give no guidance but, as the hon. Gentleman said, leave the matter entirely to the Committee's discretion?

I have said that the Committee has managed to do its work by using its judgment, and that, we believe, is much the more satisfactory solution.

Have the local authorities to go through the Capital Issues Committee?

That is another question, but I have taken note of what the hon. Member has said.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what discussions he has had with the banks, and what advice he has issued to them, on the variation of their cash ratios as part of the credit squeeze.

The answer to both parts of the Question is "None, Sir."

Has the Minister looked into the possibility of varying the liquidity ratio as part of the Government's financial measures?

That is another question. I have been asked what discussions my right hon. Friend has had with the banks, and the answer to that is as I gave it.

Is the Economic Secretary aware that the credit squeeze is working in a most extraordinary manner, and in cases of which I have given details to the House, valuable export business is being endangered because the banks have felt that they were unable to increase financial facilities for exports? Is he aware that even when the businessmen concerned have consulted his Department and the Board of Trade, they have been told that the Chancellor has not laid down any system of priorities in favour of export as against essential home business and that it is all left to the banks?

That question raises much wider issues than the Question on the Order Paper.

In view of the well-known fact that small firms are being harshly treated by the credit squeeze, will the hon. Gentleman give specific instructions to the banks to ask them not to drive small firms out of business?

That raises another question. We cannot debate the credit squeeze in answer to this Question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total number of letters and protests he has received against his recent Budget; and whether he will give a summarised list of these persons and organisations, together with similar details of those that have sent messages supporting his proposals.

Up to yesterday my right hon. Friend has received 721 communications on his Budget, of which 110 were messages of support and 611 were messages of criticism against one part of it or another. I regret that it would be impossible to summarise either of these lists, but it is clear than many of the protests were organised from a common source.

Is the Minister aware that hon. Members on both sides of the House have dozens more protests which, if they are good Members, they will send to him? Is he aware that he can expect quite a number from this side of the House? Among the hundred or so letters which the right hon. Gentleman says support the Budget, how many are from trade unions? How many representative working-class organisations have sent messages of congratulation?

I regret that I cannot answer the second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question. As to the first part, I should have thought that the hon. Member was sufficiently experienced in politics not to judge the merits of political questions entirely by the number of communications he receives.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will now consider giving non-smoking old-age pensioners a similar concession to those who smoke.

I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the reply I gave on 10th November to the hon. Member for Feltham (Mr. Hunter).

I know that reply, but can my right hon. Friend say how much this concession would cost? Does he realise that there is a very real sense of grievance here and that non-smokers feel that compared with smokers they are being penalised?

Roughly speaking, it would cost £14 or £15 million.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is now prepared to receive proposals for helping the small fixed income groups and the family man of limited means who did not benefit in the last cut in the standard rate of Income Tax.

Yes. If my hon. Friend will send me her proposals, I will gladly study them.

On a point of order. Owing to the satisfactory nature of the reply, may I beg to give notice that I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment? Would that be in order?

The hon. Lady is entitled to give notice of her intention to raise any point on the Adjournment, although I must say that it is unusual to preface such a notice with the word she has used.

Is it not a good thing sometimes to have a little change in procedure?

I may say that I have no great objection to what the hon. Lady proposes. I like to see an occasional spark of unanimity in the House.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the estimated loss to the revenue of dividend stripping operations for the financial year 1954–55, and for the first six months of the current financial year, respectively.

Full statistics are not available. From information which has become available recently, it appears that the loss from such transactions in 1954–55 was rather over £4 million. I have no information yet as to the first six months of the current year.

Since the House has been very puzzled by the right hon. Gentleman's reference to a loss of a little over six figures, which most hon. Gentlemen took to be a reference to some hundreds of thousands of pounds, is it not clear that this racket is on a much bigger scale than the right hon. Gentleman indicated to the House on Second Reading of the Finance Bill?

The phrase I used was "in excess of six figures." I took that to mean seven figures, but I am sorry if I have misled the right hon. Gentleman.

Since this was the point of the Question and the phrase "little more than six" can mean seven, eight, nine or ten, will the right hon. Gentleman now assure the House that his best estimate is that it is running into some millions of pounds, and would he say whether it is growing at the present time?

I never said anything about "little more than six." I have given the right hon. Gentleman the amount as far as we can ascertain it for 1954–55, and I said on Second Reading of the Bill that when this was showing signs of expanding so rapidly it was essential to take action in the autumn Finance Bill.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to what extent his Department's estimates of the loss to the revenue through dividend stripping include the estimated avoidance of Surtax by the vendors in addition to the tax reclaims by the purchasers of the shares in question.

The estimates in question relate only to tax on the technical losses sustained by the dealing concerns that bought the shares for dividend stripping.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the House is becoming more confused about this; that we are now to understand that when he says six he means seven, and that when he makes an estimate of a loss he is referring only to the smaller item in the loss, namely, the reclaim of Income Tax. Is he not aware that if he had included in his calculations the loss on Surtax, the total figures which he has just quoted of £4 million would probably—in very general terms—take him into eight figures, which might be a loss to the Revenue of £10 million, £12 million or £15 million? Would he not agree with that sort of estimate?

I am trying to be as frank with the House as I can. Surtax loss is a hypothetical and not an actual loss. It is quite impossible to tell what rate of Surtax might have been payable by the people concerned.

Could the right hon. Gentleman not at least have made some estimate about Surtax, for example, at 15s. in the £ for Income Tax and Surtax together? Does he not agree that this rather myopic approach to the calculation is typical of the Government's approach in general, in that they are attacking this problem only from the point of view of the buyer of the shares and not from the point of view of the vendor who is probably involved in more money?

I cannot accept the word "myopic." I have been absolutely candid with the House and all these things will be debatable.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer at what figure he estimates the loss to the Revenue of those forms of bond-washing which are not prohibited by Section 17 of the Finance Act, 1937, as consolidated by the Income Tax Act, 1952.

I regret that there is no basis on which to make such an estimate.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will define the duties of the Government directors on the Board of the British Petroleum Company in relation to Her Majesty's Government and the company, respectively.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the names of the two Government-appointed directors of British Petroleum Limited; what salary they receive from Her Majesty's Government: when they were appointed; what are the conditions of appointment; and what instructions were given to them on appointment.

Mr. F. E. Harmer and Sir Gordon Munro are the present Government directors. They receive no remuneration from public funds, but keep the fees received by them as directors of the company and its subsidiary companies. Mr. Harmer was appointed on 8th May. 1953, and Sir Gordon Munro on 26th April, 1954. In each case the appointment was for four years in the first instance. They have a general obligation to report on all matters, financial or general, which they consider should be referred to, or brought to the notice of Her Majesty's Government, and the only instruction given to them on appointment was with regard to the channel through which such reports should be submitted. In addition, they carry out the normal duties of company directors in exactly the same way as the other directors of the company.

In view of the fact that these gentlemen say that the Government take no active part or interest in the commercial management of the British Petroleum Company, and in view of the fact that their duties are based upon the very out-of-date assessment which was defined in 1914, is it not rather excessive that each of these gentlemen should draw fees to the amount of £3,250 a year from this company in view of the rather negligible duties they are called upon to perform vis-à-vis Her Majesty's Government?

The hon. and gallant Member is really under a misapprehension in thinking that Government directorships are sinecures. That is not true. Government directors play their part in all matters affecting the company's affairs in exactly the same way as other directors.

What report did they submit on the question of the very large increase in the dividend paid by the British Petroleum Company a day after the Budget in complete contradiction to the Chancellor's own request?

In answer to that question, I can only refer the right hon. Member to the reply given by my predecessor, now the Minister of State, to the hon. Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Beswick) on 27th November, 1952, when he said:

"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.]

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Adjournment, or perhaps on the Finance Bill.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury how the Government account now stands in relation to the Flood Distress Fund; and what conditions were attached to Her Majesty's Government's contribution with regard to the final disposal of the fund.

Her Majesty's Government have so far contributed £2 million to the Lord Mayor's Flood and Tempest Distress Fund. No conditions were attached. The fund itself can only make disbursements for the purposes for which it was set up.

Can my right hon. Friend inform the House how it is proposed now to continue to administer the fund, observing that there are outstanding appeals to it at present and may be in the future?

I think that is a matter for the authorities of the fund and not for the Government.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has yet received a Report from the Reorganisation Commission for Pigs and Bacon.

No, Sir. I am informed that the Commission is at present engaged in hearing evidence from the many organisations concerned with pig and bacon marketing.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that when housewives complain, as they do, about the high cost of bacon, it is difficult to satisfy them with the statement that they must await the report of the Reorganisation Commission for Pigs and Bacon? Would the Minister agree that pigs have not proved very amenable to Government planning, and does he consider this the fault of the pigs or the planners?

I think that probably the fault is the principle of Government planning. The Commission started hearing evidence only in September; this is a most important matter, and I feel that I can leave it with confidence to the chairman to arrange his programme.

Can the Minister say for how much longer he will allow the appalling bacon muddle to continue?

It would be quite inappropriate for me to deal with that question in answering the Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement giving details of the progress made in respect of implementing recommendations made by the Preservatives Sub-Committee of the Food Standards Committee to ban certain colouring substances in food.

The Sub-Committee has now considered the comments received on its recommendations and prepared a supplementary report. This has been adopted by the Food Standards Committee, and I am arranging for it to be published.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food on what date the ban on the use of agene in food becomes operative; and what precautions will be taken to ensure that nitrogen trichloride is not used in some other form in bread making.

The arrangements made by the flour millers and flour importers provide for nitrogen trichloride in any form to cease to be used in flour by the end of this year.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he proposes to take to implement the recommendations of the Waverley Committee on Coastal Flooding in so far as they affect his Department.

The two recommendations still outstanding are financial, and further consideration of them must wait until it can be seen how the finances of river boards will be affected by rating revaluation. As to the other recommendations of the Committee, I would refer my hon. and gallant Friend to the answer I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. J. E. B. Hill) on 23rd June.

In giving further consideration to the report, will the right hon. Gentleman pay particular attention to the importance of making maintenance grants to the river boards for this work? Does he realise that had our sea defences been properly maintained much loss of life might have been prevented as well as a great deal of damage?

I agree with my hon. and gallant Friend in the importance which he attaches to making sure that damage does not occur again. I am confident that the arrangements which have been made, the reconstruction which has been carried out, and the future plans of the river boards will provide for that.

Will the Minister give some indication of those areas in the country which are today particularly vulnerable to the same kind of flooding which occurred in the great catastrophe of 1953?

I think that the sea defences the whole way along the East Coast are very much stronger now than at that time, but if the hon. Gentleman has any particular area in mind and will put down a Question, I shall be glad to give him any information that I can.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if, in view of the fact that the horticultural industry does not receive support prices, he will consider a grant towards the cost of installing fuel-saving equipment.

This is one among the suggestions for assisting the horticultural industry which have been submitted to me by the National Farmers' Union and which are under consideration.

While welcoming his answer, may I express the hope that the Minister will bear in mind that in the horticultural industry costs have increased but prices have not risen; that he could help the industry very materially in this way and also save fuel, and that I hope he will be able to do something about it?

We are anxious to save fuel. I would remind my hon. Friend that there are loan facilities now available to horticulturists with glasshouses who wish to convert to oil fuel.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware that the failure of the autumn herring fishing at Yarmouth and Lowestoft has been attributed by research officers of his Department to the intensive trawling in recent years of immature herring by continental fleets operating off the Danish coast and in the spawning grounds of the English Channel; and whether he will approach the Governments of the continental countries directly concerned with a view to holding an international conference to consider what action can be taken to prevent the destruction of the sources of supply of this important industry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware of the complete failure of the East Anglian herring fishing and of the grave losses incurred by owners, merchants and fishermen in consequence; whether he is aware that this failure is related to the modern method of trawling for herring practised by continental fishers whereby immature fish are caught before spawning for fish meal; and whether he will take steps to secure international agreement to prohibit this practice.

I am greatly concerned at the poor herring catches this East Anglian season. The causes are not yet fully undestood and are being studied by my fisheries research staff. While it is possible that the increase in trawling, especially for immature herring, may have some bearing, the weight of scientific opinion is that this is far from proved to have had a major effect on the East Anglian fishery this season.

The International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, which is the forum of fisheries science of the Western and Northern European countries, is studying the matter. The International Fisheries Convention of 1946 does not embrace herring, but discussions are in progress with the other member countries with a view to concluding a wider convention.

If the right hon. Gentleman gets further information from his research officers leading to the conclusion that this trawling has a bearing on the present failure of the autumn fishing, will he get into direct touch with the Governments concerned through the usual diplomatic channels?

Yes, Sir, I will most certainly do that. I agree that it is a most disastrous season for herrings. I went out myself for two days in a fishery protection vessel and we patrolled the North Sea. I have never caught fewer fish.

Is the Minister aware that the present-day members of families of fishermen who have fished these waters for generations are firmly convinced that this over-fishing by trawling is one of the major factors? Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the letter in The Times today from the town clerk of Whitby saying that at Whitby they are having a more successful season than last year? Will the Minister prosecute to the fullest extent research into this very difficult problem which is causing great anxiety and loss in my constituency—to the extent of half-a-million pounds on catches last year?

I could not agree more with the lion. Member as to the seriousness of the situation. I assure him that we will give full weight to the possibility that over-trawling—the catching of immature fish—may be one of the explanations.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the amount of profit made by Her Majesty's Government on the sale to first-hand distributors of Danish butter and Danish bacon for the year ended 30th September, 1955.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what profit or loss his Department has made during the present financial year on the sale of bacon.

It is not the practice to disclose trading results relating to individual contracts or particulars of my Department's current trading position.

What has the Minister got to hide in this matter? The Government have now finished bulk buying. Is it not a fact that the profits are so big that the Government are ashamed to reveal them? Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that during June, July, August and September the Government were making a profit of 9d. on every 1b. of Danish butter and 1s. on every 1b. of bacon? Does he not think it scandalous, with the cost of living as high as it is, that the Government do not use bulk buying in order to keep prices lower?

I am certain that anyone with experience in commerce would agree that it would be quite disastrous to adopt the suggestion which the hon. Member has made. The Government have not got out of trading in bacon. On the question of profits and losses, I would remind the hon. Member that the Labour Government carried out much more Government trading when they were in power than we do today, and if he consults some of his colleagues upon the matter they will tell him how very often it happens that the profits on one transaction are cancelled out by the losses on another.

Was it not the case that during the period of office of the Labour Government, if they did make any profit on bulk buying, they provided at least £300 million or £400 million in consumer subsidies?

I seem to remember that in those days the losses in trading greatly exceeded the profits.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it was thoroughly reprehensible to reduce the price of bacon immediately before the Election and to increase it immediately after the Election and that it is also reprehensible to be making a profit upon bacon now, when retail prices are far too high?

Very sound commercial practice was followed. When demand decreases one lowers one's price to meet it, and when demand increases again, beyond the supplies available, one raises the price in order to equalise the position.

Does the right hon. Gentleman really mean that it was a sound commercial practice—or does he mean that it was a sound political practice—to play about with prices before and after the Election in order to suit the electoral convenience of the Government in this matter?

I used exactly the words I meant to use.

In view of the unsatisfactory reply of the right hon. Gentleman, I beg to give notice that I shall raise this matter at an early opportunity on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what advice he takes from independent experts in deciding the rate of extraction required in flour milling for National bread; what proportion of the total quantity of the flour produced in the United Kingdom comes into this category; and how much imported flour is used in the National loaf.

An independent and authoritative review is being made of the scientific and medical evidence now available on the composition and nutritive value of flour of varying extraction rates. I informed the House on 5th May last of the membership and terms of reference of the panel making the review. About 71 per cent. of the total flour milled in the United Kingdom in the year ended 30th June, 1955, was National flour. It is not possible to say how much imported flour was used in National bread.

Can my right hon. Friend state when he hopes to receive and publish the report of this panel?

I hope to receive it by about the end of this year.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the proposals he made last week in Rome to the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations for reviewing this organisation's expenditure so as to concentrate efforts on field work of direct benefit to the countries where nutritional standards are low.

Her Majesty's Government support the F.A.O. and are anxious to continue to participate fully in the good work it is doing. In my speech at the recent conference in Rome I paid a tribute to the organisation's achievements and promised our continuing support. I stressed the desirability of concentrating its resources on practical work in the field of direct benefit to countries where productivity and nutritional standards are low. I agreed as to the necessity for an increase in the budget for the next two years, but doubted the necessity for an increase as large as the draft budget suggested.

I have sent my hon. Friend copies of my statement and have had copies placed in the Library of the House.

Can my right hon. Friend state what has been the outcome of the discussions about the budget and the amounts of money that should be devoted respectively to the headquarters organisation of F.A.O. and to work in the field? Has any decision been reached?

No. Discussions on the matter of the budget are now proceeding in Rome. I should like to say that in every year that I know of the F.A.O. budget which was actually agreed to has not come up to the level of the budget first proposed. However good the work that is being done, I think that it is a good plan to scrutinise existing expenditure carefully before proceeding to new expenditure.

Is it not a fact that the Minister went to Rome, not to ask for a review of the organisation's expenditure, but to deliver an ultimatum to the Director-General that he must reduce expenditure?

No. I want to make it quite clear that, both in my speech and generally in the discussions, I said that we agreed as to the desirability of some increase in the total budget, but we were anxious to see that both the existing expenditure and the additional expenditure were concentrated as far as possible upon practical activities.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why the Commissioners of Crown Lands have allowed Faraday House, Hampton, Middlesex, to remain vacant for many years; and whether he will arrange that the Commissioners should find accommodation there for Mr. J. A. Coe, a servant of the Crown.

Faraday House is inconvenient for modern use and has been turned down by the many prospective tenants who have viewed it. Plans for converting it are at an advanced stage, but would be frustrated if accommodation in the house were now provided for Mr. Coe.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Twickenham Borough Council made this 20-roomed house available to the Commissioners of Crown Lands for housing purposes about six years ago, and that the Council is rather indignant that it has not yet been used for housing purposes? Is he further aware that it considers that the Commissioners should give room in this House to Mr. Coe, whose wife has worked at Hampton Court Palace for the last 25 years?

I am aware that Faraday House was handed back by the local authority, and I agree that it is sad that it has remained empty for so long. It may be that we were too hopeful about being able to find a tenant for it. There were long negotiations with the hospital board for its possible use as a hostel, but at the present time plans are now in hand for its conversion into two separate residences, and I hope that they will be successful.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware that the retail price of Danish butter has risen since control was removed; and what steps he will take by price control or otherwise to remedy this situation.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in view of the fact that butter is now 4s. 6d. per 1b., he will consider placing long-term contracts for this commodity on Government account.

I am aware that in a free market the price of butter varies with supply and demand. I see no reason in this for resuming Government purchase or for the reimposition of price control or rationing. Butter is obtainable today at retail prices between 3s. 8d. and 4s. 6d. per 1b.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that under the control agreement we were taking two-thirds of the total products of butter from Denmark at a very favourable price? If he is not prepared to renew that arrangement, will he tell the housewives, in particular, what steps he proposes to take to make this butter available to them at equally favourable prices?

The hon. Member talks as if by making a Government contract we somehow avoided the harsh effects of the law of supply and demand. We do not do so, and today, if we made a Government contract, it would be upon the basis of today's market prices with the country concerned.

Has the right hon. Gentleman not noticed that, just as his long-term contracts are expiring, both Danish and Australian butter have leaped up in price, as all the others are doing? To what hole-and-corner shop does he go to get butter at 3s. 8d. a 1b? Will not he consider renewing bulk purchases, especially with the Dominions?

Part of my last reply applies to the question which the hon. Lady has asked. I am not sure that there is not something wrong with the hon. Lady's marketing. I can assure the hon. Lady that Australian and New Zealand butter is obtainable today at between 3s. 8d. and 4s. 6d. a 1b. Shrinkage in the supply of Danish butter is partly seasonal, partly a result of the unusually dry summer and partly the result of new markets for Danish butter on the Continent.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food why the import of potatoes has been stopped; and what steps he is taking to secure an adequate supply for home consumption.

I understand from my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade that the open general licence issued in June of this year had been intended to permit the import from certain countries without specific licence of new potatoes and sweet potatoes only. It was found however that the terms of the open general licence were not sufficiently precise to prevent other potatoes also being imported under that licence. Accordingly, my right hon. Friend has amended the licence in order to clarify the position. In regard to the second part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Dodds) on 1st November last.

Will the Minister say in plain English whether it is now the policy of the Government to allow potato imports into this country, in view of the increasing shortage here, the fact that retail prices of potatoes are higher than they were last year and that they are likely to go higher unless we are permitted to import supplies?

I do not dissent from what the hon. Gentleman has said. In the reply which I quoted I made it clear that we are now estimating what this year's crop will produce, and if, as seems likely, it will be inadequate, we shall license imports.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what investigations have been undertaken by his research department into the square cluster method of planting potatoes which is used in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics; and if he will take steps to make the results of these investigations available to British growers.

Investigations on the spacing of potato tubers which have been carried out in this country suggest that under our conditions there would be no gain from the adoption of the square cluster method of planting. Arrangements are, however, being made for trials of this method in 1956, and the results will be published in due course.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what varieties of potatoes he anticipates will be scarce during the next six months; and what steps are being taken to ensure an adequate supply of potatoes during this period.

There are indications of a shortage of potatoes, not confined to particular varieties; as to the second part of the Question, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for Erith and Crayford (Mr. Dodds) on 1st November.

Is the Minister aware that, by the first part of his Answer, he implicitly admits that there may be a shortage of patotoes in the coming months? As this is a staple foodstuff, what is he doing to see that there will be adequate supplies?

I said just now that directly I am satisfied that there will be a shortage action will be taken, if necessary, to license imports. I have also said that the indication so far is that a shortage is likely. From that reply, I think that the hon. Member can draw his own conclusions.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether imported molasses are classified by his Department as a food with medicinal properties; if he will require that all tins of this substance bear an analysis on their label; and what proportion of the total amount consumed annually is for human and cattle consumption, respectively.

It is not a function of my Department to classify foods with medical properties. The Food Standards Committee advise me that there is no case for specifying a standard of composition for molasses, and I do not think any useful purpose would be served by requiring the disclosure of analysis on labels. I regret that information about the quantities consumed annually by human beings and cattle is not available.

While I appreciate that with certain medicines and medicinal foods an analysis already appears on the label of the tin or container, yet, seeing that there is a substantial increase in the consumption of this substance, presumably on the ground that it has medicinal properties, would it not be advisable to avoid any deception of purchasers by ensuring that the analysis is placed on the label?

This is the kind of point on which I rely on the Food Standards Committee.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware that the cost-of-living index for all items is now standing at 150; and if he will take steps to maintain stability in food prices, which are chiefly responsible for the large increase in the all-items index.

I am aware of the level of the cost-of-living index and of the benefits of stability of food prices, as in the prices of other goods and services. I am also aware that food consumption this year is running at a record high level with a strong and general demand for the higher qualities from all sections of the community. Food prices are greatly affected by weather and seasonal factors, and some of the increases in price have been due to those causes. Some have been due to increases in internal costs, such as transport and labour.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is exactly what his predecessor told us? He said that with decontrol prices would find their own level. That was four years ago. When are they going to find their own level, and what will that level be?

I am always glad when I find myself in agreement with one of my predecessors.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that food in this country is cheaper than in any other country in the world, although unless we produce food at a higher price we cannot pay the farm workers the wages they deserve?

Food prices in this country compare very favourably with the general level of prices in other countries.

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