asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now take steps to ensure that goods imported into the United Kingdom are clearly marked with the name of their country of origin.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has now given further consideration to the request of the British Pottery Manufacturers' Federation and the Pottery Workers' Society of Great Britain that imported pottery should be marked with the name of the country of origin, instead of with the words "Foreign" or "Empire"; and what conclusion he has reached.

After receiving representations from various quarters, I have decided that the withdrawal of the present option to mark goods with the words "Empire" or "Foreign" as an alternative to the name of the country of origin is inexpedient and, accordingly, I do not propose to introduce legislation to amend the Merchandise Marks Act, 1926.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Question is still regarded as a very important one by employers and workers in the pottery industry? Will he explain why it is impossible to introduce what seems to be a very simple measure to enable consumers to judge the character and quality of imported goods?

I do not think that it is in the general interest of a great trading nation such as ours to complicate the business of international trade by insisting upon the detailed marking of imported goods. We are constantly complaining to others about their doing that kind of thing.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will introduce legislation to establish a public corporation to own and operate those iron and steel undertakings the securities of which are now vested in the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency.

No, Sir. The Iron and Steel Act, 1953, remains the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

But when the right hon. Gentleman opened the new tube works at Stockton last week, did he not think of the fact that the whole of the works had been built by investments provided while the firm remained in public ownership, and would it not be a shame for it to be handed back now in the way it is proposed to do under the Iron and Steel Act?

That raises a wider question. I am deeply impressed by all the enterprise, public and private, which I see in the steel industry.

Has the right hon. Gentleman not studied the experience of the Minister of Transport? Is he not afraid that if he sells the big South Durham and other efficient firms he will shortly be in the position of holding a collection of inefficient firms which he cannot sell back? Will the right hon. Gentleman not profit by the experience of his right hon. Friend?

Questions about sales by the Agency should be addressed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that agreement has been reached in the Netherlands between fabric manufacturers, housewives' organisations, and the laundry industry on a system of informative textile labelling; and if he will appoint a committee to investigate the possibilities of similar labels for washing and cleaning fabrics in this country.

I am aware of the Netherlands agreement, which was reached on a voluntary basis. The British Standards Institution has already a committee, fully representative of the interests concerned, which is working towards a similar voluntary agreement in this country.

While I believe that I am correct in stating that on 1st December we may reach a similar stage here, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that we have been four or five years getting there? Could he not give a push in this direction?

The hon. Lady's Questions have themselves given a push in this direction.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the outcome of his official talks with Mr. Eduard Kardelj to improve trade with Yugoslavia.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of State had the pleasure of meeting Mr. Kardelj when he called on my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. There was a short but useful exchange of views about the prospects for an increase in Anglo-Yugoslav trade. In particular, the possibility of closer collaboration in the field of Yugoslavia's agricultural exports was discussed.

Was any consideration given to the fact that British traders are handicapped because Yugoslavia charges dried fruit at the nominal weight and not at the actual weight, making no allowance for loss through evaporation in transit, and that that is a hindrance to trade between Britain and Yugoslavia? Was any consideration given to that?

No detailed points of that character were raised, but if the hon. Member puts down a Question, I shall be happy to answer him.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the fact that Japan is exporting galvanised sheets to China, he will now permit a similar concession to British manufacturers.

Yes, Sir, in similar or other special circumstances a similar concession would be permitted to British manufacturers.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this announcement will give considerable satisfaction, since it is hoped that this deal between Japan and China will give a lead to concessions for manufacturers in this country, who represent industries with a traditional right to a share in an important world market? May I express the hope that, for example, the concession would extend to generators?

asked the President of the Board of Trade on what dates, and after what consultations, the list of goods banned for export to China was modified; and what items were altered.

Platform and fork-lift trucks were added to the embargo list in April, 1953. The embargo on ordinary passenger cars and on sodium peroxide was removed in October, 1953. These changes were made after consultation with the other members of the Consultative Group in Paris.

Will the President of the Board of Trade recognise that when the original list was drawn up in the implementation of this country's obligations under the United Nations Resolution there was no obligation on our part to consult anyone else? Will the right hon. Gentleman make it clear that, if there are now such consultations, that arrangement has been entered into since and is not in any way stemming from the original Resolution, which was to shorten hostilities in Korea?

I think the questions of the list and the amendment of it are for the Foreign Office, but they do stem from the United Nations Resolution. We have agreed with these other nations to draw up an agreed list and alter it by negotiation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement concerning the proposed meeting in Geneva, on 18th January, 1956, of the member-nations of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

Following the passage last summer by the United States Congress of the Trade Agreements Extension Act, the Contracting Parties to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade have agreed to arrange for further multilateral negotiations for the reduction of the general level of tariffs. These negotiations, in which about twenty-five Contracting Parties, including ourselves and the United States will be taking part, are to open at Geneva on 18th January, 1956. They will take place under substantially the same rules and procedures as previous tariff negotiations under the General Agreement, and the usual procedures for consultation both with industry and with other Commonwealth countries are being followed.

If we are to have "Trade, not aid," would the President agree that the United States should be asked to stop putting a percentage increase on bids made by British companies?

That raises a rather different question. There is a Question later on the Order Paper which deals with that point.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the difficulties of the horticultural industry when entering into these discussions?

I shall bear in mind the interests of all industries in the consultations that take place.

Is the right hon. Gentleman going to this conference with any positive proposals for reducing tariffs in the United Kingdom?

Request lists are exchanged under this procedure between the countries concerned before negotiations take place.

May I make it clear to the right hon. Gentleman that there is a difference between the supplementary question which I put to him and the Question on the Order Paper? I asked whether he will make representations to all the contracting parties against the United States procedure on bids?

That raises a different question from the one on the Order Paper, which is concerned with general negotiation on tariff levels.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why he declines to make representations to the United States Government against the addition to the lowest foreign bid of 12 per cent. for the purpose of appraising bids.

The new rule adopted by the Department of the Interior is a clarification and an improvement on what has happened before. Previously a low bid by a foreign firm had little, if any, chance of success if the lowest United States bidder intended to manufacture the plant in an area of substantial unemployment as defined by the Secretary of Labour. In the circumstances, it would be inappropriate to make representations to the United States Government against the decision.

It may be an improvement upon past procedure, but it is still bad; it prevents trade. Surely the President ought, on behalf of the Government, to make representations against this development?

We have to maintain some sense of proportion about this subject. Had we an area in this country where the unemployment level was 6 per cent., we should be trying to introduce some form of protection for it.

But will not my right hon. Friend look at this again? Is it not the case that there is virtually no bicycle industry in America comparable with our industry but yet they have restricted the import of bicycles from this country?

I have already stated my view about the bicycle position in the United States very plainly, but I think that is different from this question of areas of substantial unemployment.

Is not the President aware that we have never sought to use protection of any kind, whether tariff protection or refusal of bids, as a means of dealing with the problem of one of the Development Areas, but that both parties have accepted the Distribution of Industries Act? Should not the right hon. Gentleman suggest to the American Government that the right way to deal with the problem would be by the use of similar procedure?

Whatever I suggested to the United States, I am bound to say that this arrangement under which the American firms get virtually 12 per cent. tariff protection is better than the system which existed before, when, if there was an area of substantial unemployment, we had no chance whatever of getting a contract.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many tenders from this country for United States contracts, during the past five years, have proved to be the lowest and according to requirements, but have subsequently been rejected for other reasons; and what is the approximate total value of the orders thus lost.

I regret that this information is not available since Her Majesty's Government do not necessarily hear the results of all the tenders for United States contracts.

Does not the President feel that he would be fortified in the prospective conference in Geneva if he had this information, and would it not be of some benefit to the whole House if the information were obtained?

It would be a rather large undertaking to ask every industry to inform me of the tenders which they had put in, those which were accepted and those which were rejected. Even then I should be hard put to it to know the precise reasons for the rejections.

How can the President say that he is giving every encouragement to British exporters when he does not make representations against trade restrictions of this kind in the United States?

I have never hesitated to make representations in cases where I think they can properly be made.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will list the main industries for which he has evidence that the export drive is flagging at the present time as a result of uncompetitive prices.

No, Sir. Conditions vary widely, but some export business is certainly being lost in a variety of trades because prices are too high. It is vital that we should keep down our costs.

Has not the President seen the articles in the Financial Times and elsewhere showing, for example, that our engineering industries have at the moment a price index of 103 to 104 compared with Germany's 99 to 100? Would it not be better if the Government followed a policy which would restrain wages and prices, or help people to want to restrain wages by restraining prices, so that our prices in the overseas markets would be competitive?

That raises fairly wide issues, but I would say that the principal impediment to the export trade is the condition of inflation in this country and that the prime purpose of Government policy must be to contain that inflation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he would be prepared to make an additional grant to the British Standards Institution so that the results of the labelling "quiz" now being carried out by that organisation may be given additional publicity.

Publicity of this kind would be a matter for the British Standards Institution, which exercises its own discretion in the allocation of its funds.

I am aware of that, but may I ask whether the President would not agree that this is a vicious circle and that, unless further publicity is given to this sort of thing, the position of the trade interests will not be affected? Would not the President give the British Standards Institution further money to bring this about?

I have had no request for further money from the British Standards Institution, but, in any event, expenditure of this kind should be taken out of its general grant.

Does not the President agree that the question of improvement of labelling and marking is very important? Would he be prepared to assist the British Standards Institution in every way and give an assurance that any steps taken would apply equally to imported as well as home-produced goods?

That is rather a lot of questions, but, as the House knows, the British Standards Institution has my full support.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that nothing short of an earthquake will shift some sections of the textile industry in their opposition to consumer labelling, and is he prepared to help the British Standards Institution to change that?

We have to proceed on the basis of voluntary arrangements and on the basis on which the Institution has worked for a number of years. There is no reason why those who think that we should go faster should not say so, and the hon. Lady is to be counted notably among them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give details concerning prosecutions undertaken by his Department under the Merchandise Marks Acts since 1st August, 1953, against firms alleged to have applied false trade descriptions, such details to include trade descriptions in respect of which summonses were issued, and such penalties as may have been imposed by the courts.

Since 1st August, my Department has brought 34 charges against 21 firms alleged to have applied false trade descriptions. Seventeen firms were committed on 25 charges. Fines ordered to be paid and costs were approximately £700. I am arranging for a statement to be sent to the hon. Member setting out the details for which she asks.

May I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on this notable achievement, which hon. Members on this side of the House have been urging upon him for a very long time? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that most of these cases could have been avoided if producers had been compelled to label their goods satisfactorily, and could not the Board of Trade give a lead in that direction?

As the hon. Lady knows, there is an honest difference between us. I do not believe in compulsory marking and the hon. Lady does.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what inquiries he made during his visit to Peterlee into the industrial needs of the new town; whether he is aware that few facilities for the employment of female and disabled workers exist in the area; and what efforts are being made by his Department to attract light industries.

I am aware of the industrial needs of Peterlee. The two Government-financed factories which have been completed recently in Peterlee are expected to recruit a larger number of female workers than are at present registered as unemployed and will also provide employment for disabled persons in the area. A third small factory has recently been approved and the Board of Trade will continue to try to attract suitable light industry in step with the development of housing.

But is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at neither of the two factories, one of which is not yet started, will there be provided employment for disabled ex-miners and ex-Service men; that, in the main, female labour will be employed there? When the right hon. Gentleman was in Peterlee the other day—I do not know whether he stopped there—did he make inquiries about the industrial needs of that area? Will he not do something for this new town?

I did have the opportunity of visiting Peterlee for a short time a few days ago. I saw these two factories and went into one of them. There are 1,819 workers in Peterlee registered as disabled, and 79 of them are at present unemployed. I shall bear in mind their interests as well as other interests in that area in trying to encourage new factory development there.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what evidence he has to show that exports prohibited from export to certain countries are nevertheless being exported to countries not on the embargo list and then re-exported from these to those on the list.

While it is probable that some such re-export takes place, I have no evidence that the purpose of our controls is being frustrated to any material extent.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that it is very necessary to try to discover whether by indirect routes some of these materials are in fact reaching the countries on the embargo list? Is he aware, in particular, that a good deal of rubber goes from Czechoslovakia and other countries and that there are bitter complaints in Malaya and Hong Kong that they have lost their trade?

The hon. Member is quite right in saying that we ought constantly to watch, where we have strategic controls, to see that they are enforced as far as they can be enforced. He knows that we have various arrangements for trans-shipment and transaction control designed to secure that end. I am by no means saying that they are perfect or that the arrangements are completely watertight, but we do our best to see that they are properly observed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on prospects of future factory development and the erection of new factories and extensions of existing factories in the principality of Wales.

Nearly 2½ million sq. ft. of industrial building were approved in the 12 months ending 30th September, 1955, but it is not possible to forecast the rate of construction.

Is my right hon. Friend devoting particular attention to the case of factories which are merely branches of factories in other parts of the United Kingdom?

The general level of building is keeping up very well in South Wales. I have no figures here to show how many are branch factories.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his hon. Friend the Member for Barry (Mr. Gower) is getting far more for his constituency than I am getting for mine?

We will see that Peterlee gets a fair deal as well.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the area in Wales where factories are urgently needed is that of the counties of Caernarvon and Anglesey, in particular, where unemployment is running about 7 to 8 per cent.? Will he not redouble his efforts to induce industrialists to enter these areas as soon as possible?

The hon. Gentleman has on a number of occasions made very forceful representations to me on the particular problems of those areas. They have raised problems which are a little different from those of the Development Areas which I have been discussing in answer to the Question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement upon current trends in trade with South American countries; and what proposals he has for facilitating the growth of this trade.

Our exports to the dollar countries of South America have been gradually increasing. In the non-dollar countries there has been no significant change in our total exports during the last three years. The Government's policies for reducing inflation at home are designed to stimulate growth of our exports as a whole, and the Government's general services to exporters are fully available to facilitate trade with South America. In addition, the Dollar Exports Council, with the Government's support, includes the dollar countries in this area within the scope of its activities.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask how far the ability of such countries as the Argentine and Brazil to purchase from this country has been affected by the recent reduction in our coal exports?

No, Sir, not without notice.

Would the Minister state in figures what "gradually" means in the case of the Argentine?

I will let the right hon. Gentleman have the figures.

Although there has been an increase in the figures, can the right hon. Gentleman state how they compare with those for 1952–53–54?

If the right hon. Gentleman will put down a Question asking for the figures of the particular years which he wants, I will at once give him any figures he requires.

More to the point, can my right hon. Friend say what steps we are taking to increase our exports to those countries and what special negotiations are being held either with the Argentine or Brazil at present?

If my hon. Friend will look at the Answer, he will see that the main purpose of our policy at present is to reduce the inflation at home in order that we may export more abroad. If I may say so, it is very much to the point to follow out an internal policy of that kind rather than to hope to increase trade by bilateral negotiations outside.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that dried grass is currently being imported into this country from Canada; and whether he will state the quantity and expenditure in dollars estimated as likely to be incurred on this account.

No, Sir. I can trace no record of any recent imports of dried grass from Canada, nor have I any record of an import licence having been issued. The second part of the Question does not therefore arise.

Is not this extraordinary? I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman will check the answer again? There is now a ship in Aberdeen from which dried grass is being sold for £39 10s. a ton. At the same time Mark Lane was yesterday quoting forward deliveries of dried grass from Canada at £36 12s. a ton. As this is using 100 dollars a ton to replace a home product—a product which used to be grown here but the growing of which is now dying away—does not the right hon. Gentleman think he ought to be active about this?

I will certainly be active about it and will follow up the information the right hon. Gentleman has given me. My information is that dried grass is not being imported, and the only comparable import which I can trace is that of alfalfa hay, which was a gift for a racehorse.

May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman's first statement was correct—that dried grass cannot be imported without an import licence?

I think I said "from Canada."

In view of the President's remarks about a gift for a racehorse, may I ask whether he is aware that the shipload in Aberdeen to which I referred is being offered for sale at £39 10s. a ton and that the kind of quibble which he made does not help us in the misuse of our dollars?

There is no need for the right hon. Gentleman to get too indignant. I was indicating that my information related to something separate from that which the right hon. Gentleman has given me, and I have offered to look into the information which he put before the House.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what restrictions there are on the sale of English grain abroad.

Export is subject to licence, but at present licences are being issued provided there is evidence of a firm order.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has now considered the representations of the Staff Side of the Civil Service National Whitley Council and the several organisations of retired civil servants regarding the hardship caused by rising costs to retired public servants; and whether he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. I refer the hon. Member to the reply my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury gave on 17th November to Questions by the hon. Members for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) and Poole (Captain Pilkington).

I noticed that reply, which was very welcome. May I now ask the Chancellor whether he proposes to consult any representative bodies before he places his proposal before the House?

I should want notice of that question. We are at present in the stages of finally preparing our plans.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what representations he has received with regard to the need for an upward review of the pensions paid to persons formerly employed in the public services.

Representations have been received from many bodies, including the Public Service Pensioners Council, the Officers Pensions Society and the Staff Side of the Civil Service National Whitley Council.

Before the Chancellor announces his decision in response to these representations, will he have full regard to the fact that in terms of 1938, when their contributions were made, the £ is now worth only 7s. 8d., or less, and that many of these people are living in painful poverty through no fault of their own?

That is why the Government have so wisely given the answer on this subject which they have given.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proposals he now has for an increase in public servants' pensions.

I have as yet nothing to add to the reply my right hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury gave the hon. Member on 17th November.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that when I refer to public servants I am now referring to ex-employees of the nationalised industries? Will he consult with the Ministers responsible to see that the position of all these ex-employees is looked at, bearing in mind that the view ought to be taken by the Government, in my submission, that small fixed income groups ought to be considered as a whole with a view to an amelioration of their position?

I can certainly undertake to consult my colleagues in the Government.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) the reasons for the dismissal of C. M. Coldham by the Board of Inland Revenue on 14th April, 1955, to take effect from 22nd March, 1955;

(2) whether, prior to his dismissal by the Board of Inland Revenue on 22nd March, Mr. C. M. Coldham had been given the opportunity to state his point of view to a senior official of the Board of Inland Revenue other than the investigating officer;

(3) on whose authority members of the staff of the Board of Inland Revenue's Valuation Office, Great Yarmouth, were instructed early this year by an Inland Revenue investigating officer to obtain evidence about their superior, C. M. Coldham, without his knowledge; and to what extent this is normal procedure.

As Mr. Coldham was informed at the time, he was dismissed for serious irregularities in his claims for travelling expenses and subsistence allowances, which he did not deny; these of themselves precluded his retention in the public service. Mr. Coldham's own statements were recorded by the investigating officers and reported to the Board, but he was not specifically invited to state his point of view to any other official. The steps taken in this case were justified in the exceptional circumstances.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that the reasons for the dismissal bore a very close relation to the charges which were brought against Mr. Coldham by the Board of Inland Revenue? Will he also state what was the result of those criminal proceedings? Does the Chancellor not realise that there is a settled procedure laid down to ensure that neither dismissal nor any other serious punishment is given unfairly, hastily or without due consideration of the civil servant's point of view? May I ask him whether he would conduct a full inquiry into the way in which these investigations were carried out?

Mr. Coldham was acquitted of a criminal charge. My hon. Friend knows that and need not have asked me the question. Dealing with the second part of his question, about procedure, I am satisfied that the Board of Inland Revenue could not, in the exceptional circumstances, have acted differently from the way in which they did act. I think their record shows over many years—and they have an immense staff—that they act with justice. Answering the third question, about an inquiry, I am not prepared to hold out any hopes to my hon. Friend, but if it would be of any assistance to him I should be ready, and I know the Chairman of the Board of Inland Revenue would also be ready, to see him and discuss the matter with him.

Will the right hon. Gentleman suggest to his hon. Friend that when cases of this kind are to be raised in the House it would be a great deal better not to give publicity to the names of the individuals concerned but to furnish details separately and then to raise the matter as a general issue?

Is the Chancellor aware that these details have been furnished to the Chancellor? Is my right hon. Friend also aware, when he talks about exceptional circumstances, that I have been trying to find out for weeks and weeks what the exceptional circumstances were and that I could not do so? Can he say what the exceptional circumstances were?

In answer to the right hon. Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson), that is a matter for the discretion of the hon. Member himself and it is usually better for the person concerned that names should not be mentioned. Will the hon. Member for Yarmouth (Mr. Fell) be good enough to put his point again?

I wanted to know what were the exceptional circumstances which justified Mr. Coldham being dismissed, rather than being suspended and subsequent action taken?

I do not want further to prejudice this case. I have offered that conversations can take place; but if I am to continue to answer public questions on this, it is fortunately most exceptional that a head of a department commits offences of this sort and then does not deny them when the facts have all been put before him.

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

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware of the concern at the recent announcement that the cost-of-living index has been increased by two points in one month; and what action is being taken to restore the index to a similar position as that which applied in October, 1951.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action he is taking to stabilise and reduce the cost of living in view of the fact that the cost-of-living index figure had risen by seven points from September, 1954, to September, 1955.

I am most anxious that the rise in the cost of living should be checked: but, as I have said many times, this cannot be done by Government action alone. The Government, for their part, have taken a number of anti-inflationary measures, of which the House is aware, and we are watching their effects carefully. But it is equally essential that all sections of the community should play their appropriate parts by increasing productivity, by reducing the prices of their products wherever possible, by exercising restraint in wages and dividend policies and by saving more.

In view of the acceleration of price increases, will the Chancellor state what has gone wrong with the promise to stabilise prices and mend the hole in the purse? Will he take this opportunity to utter a few words of comfort to housewives who feel they have been badly let down?

I can only say that by our policies we reached a state of approximate equilibrium in this vital matter between 1953–54 for the first time for many years, and right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite would be the first to acknowledge that. It is also the case now that, owing to the increasing consumer demand and other reasons connected with inflation, which are in fact symptoms of our advanced prosperity, at the present moment we are undergoing a degree of inflation which we are attempting to cure. I hope that our policies will be crowned with the same success as after the first two and a half years of our Administration.

While we all appreciate the Chancellor's difficult position in the light of what was said a few months ago, will he at least refrain from taking positive steps to increase the cost of living, for instance, through Purchase Tax increases in the new lists? Will he further follow the line he started last night in abandoning the increase in Purchase Tax on baskets and bags and abandon it on a lot of other things which he has brought into the Schedule?

The answer broadly, as is sometimes usual with the right hon. Gentleman's questions, is "No, Sir"; but I will undertake that we shall pursue our policies with a view to attempting to restore this equilibrium in the wage-price and other spirals which we have recently experienced.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will take steps to increase the number of Government-appointed directors on the board of the British Petroleum Company.

No, Sir.

Will the Chancellor not agree that it is thoroughly undesirable that this Government-controlled company should flout the appeals for dividend restraint within a day of his having made them. What does he propose to do about that?

I was asked the specific question whether I would increase the number of directors and my answer was "No." The hon. Member's point, although important, raises somewhat wider issues which I cannot answer in reply to the Question.

Can the Chancellor say whether he received any information from the Government-appointed directors that this increase of the dividend was contemplated? If so, what advice did he give to the Government-appointed directors?

There is a later Question on the Order Paper which I should not like to prejudice by an advanced answer.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the date on which Mr. F. E. Harmer and Sir Gordon Munro reported to Her Majesty's Government the intention of the Board of Directors of British Petroleum Limited to declare an interim dividend eight times larger than the previous one.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the then Economic Secretary, 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.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this grossly inflated dividend, coming only one day after he had made his Budget speech urging restraint in dividend and wage claims, makes nonsense of that speech when the dividend is declared by a Government-controlled company? Will he not, therefore, look at the matter again and say whether or not he did give any instruction to the Government-appointed directors?

No. I am not prepared to go further than my reply, and I do not think that any Government would be prepared to do so; but I am prepared to remind the hon. Gentleman of what the Economic Secretary told him on 10th November—that in the light of the statement made at the meeting of the company in December we should suspend judgment until the total distribution for the year is known.

To clarify the position, would the Chancellor say whether, as Chancellor, he does accept or does not accept responsibility for what the two Government-appointed directors do when they are members of the British Petroleum Company's board?

A certain practice has been followed for these directors by every Government since 1914. It is not to interfere in the commercial management of the company but to let them play their ordinary part as directors. The present Government directors are following the policy which has been followed by Government directors under every Government since that date.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the Report of the Inspector appointed to inquire into the affairs of the Chinese Engineering & Mining Company Limited with a view to seeing whether there has been any infringement of the Control of Borrowing Order, 1947, in this case.

I am advised that it appears that there may have been an infringement of the Order, and I am making further inquiries according to the procedure prescribed by the Statute.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, taking the value of the £ at 20s. in 1945, what was its value in 1952 and at the latest available date.

Taking the internal purchasing power of the £ as 20s. in 1945, it is estimated that the corresponding figure for 1952 is 14s. and for October, 1955, 12s. 8d. This estimate is based on the Consumer Price Index from 1945 to 1954 and the Interim Index of Retail Prices since then.

Does that mean that under Socialism the value of the £ fell by 6s.?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to what extent he attributes the recent weakening in the transferable sterling rate to Egyptian payments to Czechoslovakia.

While there have been day-to-day fluctuations, to which I should hesitate to attribute any particular significance, I am not aware of any recent weakening in the rate of exchange for transferable sterling.

Is the Chancellor not aware that it was stated in informed quarters two or three weeks ago that the transferable rate was having to be supported by the Bank of England on the Zurich free market because of payments from Egypt for Czechoslovakian arms in transferable sterling? Is it not highly undesirable that his exchange policy has got us into the position of having to support these transactions?

No, Sir. As usual, I am very well advised and am aware of the source of the hon. Member's information, a notable periodical which both he and I read. As banker for the sterling area, it would not be proper to make observations on transactions of that sort. As I am responsible for the Exchange Equalisation Fund, I am not prepared to say whether we intervened or not.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the comparative figures of food subsidies, including agricultural deficiency payments, paid out by the Government in 1946, 1951 and 1954.

The food subsidies, including production grants and subsidies administered by the Agricultural Departments and by the Board of Trade, amounted to £335·3 million, and £427·1 million in the financial years 1946–47 and 1951–52, respectively. The corresponding figure for 1954–55 is estimated at £330·8 million, including the agricultural deficiency payments for fatstock and cereals which were introduced in July, 1954.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what reduction has been made in the purchase of paper by Her Majesty's Government during the past six months compared with the previous six months.

Paper purchased in the six months to 30th September, 1955, was 555 tons less than in the previous six months.

While I welcome this reduction, is my right hon. Friend aware that if he makes further reductions of one-third in the purchase of Government paper, he will not only save about £2 million in expenditure and 15,000 tons of paper, but release for industry a large number of people from the Civil Service and industry who could be employed on work more profitable than filling up forms?

At any rate, the trend has recently been in the right direction, although I am informed by my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General that there is a poor outlook for paper, because telephone directories take up a great deal.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will amend Section 20 of the Superannuation Act, 1834, under which the pension of a retired civil servant is suspended during his re-employment.

I am not prepared to make any fundamental change in this Section. The Royal Commission on the Civil Service has considered a minor change and its recommendation—in favour of the status quo—will be considered along with the Commission's other recommendations on Civil Service pensions.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that many retired civil servants are finding it necessary to seek re-employment at a lower level, and that Section 20 of the Superannuation Act, 1834, is not in keeping with the conditions of 1955?

I am aware of it. The hon. Member will be aware that the Superannuation Acts were amended to enable a re-employed pensioner to earn up to five extra years of pensionable service in respect of his re-employment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the further measures which are under consideration to assist retired members of the public services will also cover retired members of the Armed Forces.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will re-examine the position of retired officers of the Fighting Services with a view to pension increases when the proposed increases for retired public servants take place.

The answer to both Questions is "Yes, Sir."

May I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply and ask him whether he can indicate when we may be likely to have a further statement on the proposed measures?

As the Financial Secretary said, we hope in the New Year.

Will the Minister remember that the pre-1950 pensioners have, in the main, fought in both wars and are worthy of special consideration?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will introduce legislation to prohibit charges being made by Scottish banks to hire-purchase customers for services rendered as agents of hire-purchase finance companies.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that people in poor circumstances who are paying a few shillings a week are having the payments raised by more than 25 per cent. in some instances, and that this is being done without their agreement or consent? Does he realise that the finance companies are not at all willing to adopt alternative forms of payment? Why on earth should not the banks make a normal charge to the finance companies in the same way as they do to local authorities or to gas companies when they act as their collecting agents?

I am aware of the difficulty. The banks seem to charge 1s. a time. This is really a matter between the hire-purchase companies and their customers. In England, the difficulty does not arise because the hire-purchase finance companies are themselves customers of their English banks. A similar practice to that to which the hon. Member refers is, however, adopted in Ireland.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this practice, which has occurred since he introduced his hire-purchase restriction policy, has any relation to that policy; and is it at his instigation that this further handicap has seen put upon hire purchase?

I am responsible for a great deal, but I really do not think that I have very much personal responsibility for this.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider making grants to the national collection and museums on a quinquennial basis in future, such grants to be administered by a committee appointed by him on the lines of the University Grants Committee.

The analogy with the universities is not close, and I am doubtful whether this suggestion would be practicable, even if it were acceptable to the national institutions as a whole.

Is not the Chancellor aware of the widespread dissatisfaction with the present method and level of grants to these institutions, and does not he think that some suggestion like this might restore to the trustees of these institutions some responsibility for purchases and avert their having to go cap in hand to the Treasury every time they want to make an important purchase?

This was not the view of the National Standing Commission on Museums and Galleries which, in its Fourth Report, in 1954, thought that this sort of idea would not appeal to the institutions concerned. I am certainly ready to consider any reasonable suggestion to help these institutions, but I do not think that it would help them if we adopted this proposition.

Is not it the case that in all these transactions where objects of art are concerned, the knowledge of art dealers that large trust funds are available at any given time tends to increase the price of the pictures and other objects which are sold?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the recent special statement of the Trades Union Congress, a copy of which has been sent to him, and which is critical of the impact of his economic and financial policy on wage demands; and whether he will make a statement.

I assume that the statement referred to by the hon. Gentleman is that which was in the Press on 24th November. I welcome this statement so far as it calls attention to the threat to our balance of payments, full employment and living standards, which is constituted by the process of "incomes" rising faster than prices. I cannot be expected to accept the criticisms of the measures which I have adopted to restrain what the statement describes as "the excessively high level of demand at home."

But does not the Chancellor see that his Budget and the extra-budgetary measures recently introduced are making absolutely impossible the position of responsible trade union leaders with their eyes on the dangers of wage demands giving us uncompetitive prices abroad?

I should have thought that trade union leaders, judging by the tone of this document, are sufficiently robust to stand up to every sort of difficulty. When they reflect that there has been less than a one-point rise in the cost-of-living index due to the Purchase Tax proposals, I do not think it can be said that this is the sole cause of their difficulty.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether expenses incurred at publicity lunches by book publishers are allowable under tax regulations as expenses for Income Tax purposes.

Such expenses are allowable if incurred wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade.

Does not the Chancellor think it very regrettable that occasions of this sort should be used to glamorise crime, even if the occasion is graced by the presence of Lady Docker and her husband?

I am not prepared to go into particular tax matters or particular personalities. I will therefore make no observation upon the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question.

Is not the anomalous situation due to the fact that under the law which has existed for many years the Chancellor's phrase is "wholly and exclusively" and not "wholly, exclusively and necessarily" which would apply to the Income Tax assessments of all hon. Members of this House and all individuals charged upon a professional basis? Is it not a further fact that, by and large, it is the decision of the company concerned and not of the Inland Revenue which determines whether these payments are to be regarded as being wholly and exclusively for the purposes of the trade?

The company decides about undertaking a function, but the Inland Revenue always has its opportunity of interpreting Section 137 of the Income Tax Act. 1952.