asked the President of the Board of Trade when, in view of the protest being made to the Council of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade by the Danish Government concerning the proposed 10 per cent. import duty on bacon, he will be able to make a statement upon the position.

No such protest has been made. Since the hon. Lady put down her Question, our negotiations with Denmark have been concluded, and the resulting Agreement has been published in Cmd. 9707.

As the Minister of State, Board of Trade, on 28th February, said that we did not impose settlements on our friends, such as Denmark, can the President of the Board of Trade explain why the Prime Minister of Denmark has said that she could not sign a formal agreement accepting the principle of the tariff, though, at the same time, she had no means of preventing Britain from applying it? Is not that a rather strange interpretation by the right hon. Gentleman?

The whole matter is fully and accurately set out in Cmd. 9707. I do not think that I wish to add to it.

The right hon. Gentleman has not answered my question. If, as the Minister of State said, we do not impose settlements upon our friends, why has the Danish Prime Minister said that they have signed no agreement?

The hon. Lady's Question asked about a protest in connection with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and no such protest has been made.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is in a position to make a statement concerning the evidence submitted to him by the hon. Member for Coventry, South, on 15th February last, dealing with false claims made by toothpaste manufacturers; and what action is proposed under the Merchandise Marks Acts by his Department.

My inquiries into the matter are not yet complete, but I will communicate with the hon. Lady as soon as possible.

Does the President think that his inquiries will take much longer? There is considerable disquiet in the dental profession about this type of advertisement.

In view of the possibility of a prosecution, I would prefer not to make any comment at this stage.

I also would prefer the right hon. Gentleman not to prejudice the position.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what proportion of their output has been exported by leading British motor car firms in each year from 1950 to 1955;

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

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what steps he has taken, or proposes to take, to stimulate those firms which have done relatively badly in the export trade? Is he aware that, taking 1951 as a base, the whole of the extra cars produced since that year have remained on the home market?

I would rather not comment upon the figures. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would study those contained in the Answer which will be circulated.

Does the President really think it sufficient for the Government to create unemployment in the motor car industry and just hope that exports will increase? Can he tell us a single step that he is taking to encourage exports?

I have considered the proposals to ration steel which were put forward by the right hon. Gentleman, and I have rejected them.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that exports of commercial vehicles have been increasing every year, and now amount to about £85 million per annum, and that the exports of parts and accessories have also been increasing, and now amount to about £106 million a year? Is it not a fact that, taking the whole field of the motor industry, the value of exports has been going up year by year?

Yes.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I made no proposal for rationing steel? If his other information is as inaccurate as that it is not very sound.

I find it very helpful that no suggestion to ration steel is being put forward as the official policy of the Opposition.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the increasing amount of short time and redundancy in the motor car industry, what arrangements he is making to hear in person the views of both sides of the industry upon the present situation.

None, Sir; both sides of the industry were represented at the meeting of the National Advisory Council for the Motor Manufacturing Industry on 7th March, and I have been informed of the views then expressed about the present situation in the motor industry. I doubt whether the industry would be able to add to the points so recently expressed but, as the hon. Member is aware, I am ready at all times to hear their views.

The Minister said last week that he was quite willing to hear both sides of the industry. In view of the very serious perturbation about the situation in the motor car industry, would he not take the initiative and invite both sides of the industry to make a first-hand account to himself personally, as I understand he has not attended this committee?

The views of the committee have just been placed before the Board of Trade. I am quite willing to see the committee at any time, as it well knows.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that free private enterprise under the present Government is creating not only redundancy but unemployment? Is that the policy of the Government? Unless the right hon. Gentleman takes steps, as he can, to remedy the situation, he may find himself redundant very soon.

The hon. Gentleman is raising a much wider point, rather a personal point. I do not stand here in any way to apologise for the measures introduced by Her Majesty's Government, which I think are entirely appropriate to the situation.

While the redundancy of the right hon. Gentleman is long overdue, may I ask if he is not aware, in relation to the export position dealt with me the Question, that certain other countries, not only Germany but France and Italy, have increased the value of their exports very considerably? Has he any comment to make on the fact that our own export efforts seem to be badly rewarded in comparison with the efforts of the nationalised motor car industries of France and Germany?

I did not know that it was the policy of the party opposite to nationalise the motor industry, but I take note of that point.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Britain now only occupies the fourth place among those nations which export cars to Switzerland; and, in view of the decline in the export of cars to that country, what action he is taking to assist in remedying this position.

I am aware that direct exports of cars from the United Kingdom were marginally lower last year than in 1954. There are no restrictions on the import of cars into Switzerland.

Is the President aware that more than 50 per cent. of the motor cars imported by Switzerland came from Germany—a very serious competitor of ours; and may I ask what he is prepared to do either to advise on or to remedy the situation?

There are no restrictions in this market. We have exactly the same chance as have the Germans and the French, and the only way to sell more cars is to produce a better car at a lower price than those of other countries.

As the President of the Board of Trade keeps telling us what he is not doing in the matter, does he not really recognise any responsibility to try to encourage British exports, and can he tell us of any single thing that he is doing?

I have said that I reject rationing of steel and the nationalisation of the motor industry, as proposed by hon. Members opposite.

Will not the right hon. Gentleman take a responsible interest in this matter? Does he not think that he should say what the Government are doing to help this vital industry to recapture the markets that it once held?

It is important for the House to recognise that we have here an open market, with just the same chances of competition as anyone else. There is no easy short cut to getting that motor car trade except by producing a better car at a cheaper price.

is my right hon. Friend aware that his Answers command complete support on this side of the House, and that the motor car industry is quite capable of looking after itself?

Is the President aware that the Answers which he has given to my hon. and right hon. Friends' main and supplementary questions are precisely the same answers—almost word for word—as those which he has been giving on behalf of the Government in respect of the Lancashire industry for four or five years? As the Government's policy there has now had the experience of five years of utter failure, will he not reconsider the matter with regard to both the Midlands and Lancashire?

If I have from time to time expressed the view on a number of industries that their principal responsibility is to be competitive in the markets of the world, I am not ashamed of that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will consider publishing at suitable intervals of time the statistics showing the export performances of the principal British car firms.

No, Sir. It would be contrary to normal practice to publish statistics showing the contribution of individual firms to the exports of the motor industry.

Since the Minister has been saying all the afternoon that what this industry needs is more aggressive overseas salesmanship, will he not agree that this is partly a psychological matter and that it would be a good thing to publish this league table not only to educate the public but also to make the firms export even more and do their job in overseas markets?

No, Sir. All Governments need full statistics upon which to form their policies, but if it were known that they intended to use those statistics by publishing the trading results of individual firms, no Government would ever be able to collect them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the cost of tobacco purchased by this country from dollar sources in 1955; and the estimated cost for 1956.

The value of the tobacco and tobacco manufactures imported from the dollar area in 1955 was £55·7 million. These imports include tobacco worth $15 million acquired from the United States of America as Commodity Aid. I cannot yet give an estimate for 1956.

Can we really go on with this collossal dollar expenditure on tobacco? What has been done to get more tobacco from sterling sources, particularly from places in the Commonwealth?

As the hon. Gentleman probably knows, there are long-term contracts for the purchase of tobacco from the Commonwealth.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why the import quota for Argentine apples and pears for the current year is £780,000, when the figure envisaged in the Anglo-Argentine Agreement on Trade and Payments of March, 1955, Command Paper No. 9463, is only £650,000.

£780,000 is the c.i.f. equivalent of the Agreement quota of £650,000 f.o.b.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the reply which he gave to a similar Question on 2nd February he said that this was not a matter of major importance? Has he had any further communication from the Australian Government, who look upon these increased imports as of great importance in view of their trade gap difficulties? Does not my right hon. Friend think that we should encourage the importation of Australian fruit rather than of Argentine fruit?

I have had no communication from the Australian Government. I think there is another Question on the Paper on this subject.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the import of pears from Argentina for 1955 amounted to about 4,300 cases, whilst supplies which have now arrived, or were due by 8th March, are approximately 140,000 cases; and if he will make a statement.

Imports of pears from Argentina in 1955 were very small. While I was not aware of these particular figures, they suggest that much fuller use will be made of the limited quota this year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the increase of pears from the Argentine in the first two months of this year is enormous? In view of the difficulties of the trade gap, does he not think that he should take some steps by tariff or otherwise to restrict these imports so that we can supply these goods from the Commonwealth.

These imports are strictly limited by quota.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a further statement on the supply of imported fruit, particularly apples and pears; what further considerations he has given to the protest made by the Australian Government with regard to the importation of apples and pears at a landed price, which indicates unfair competition resulting from currency manipulations; and what reply he has sent.

Imports of Australian apples and pears are admitted freely and amounted to £6,500,000 in 1955; imports from all non-sterling sources are restricted. Imports from Argentina are limited to £650,000 f.o.b. this year and take place at the free exchange rate. Full information on this subject has been supplied to the Australian Government.

Should we not look after Commonwealth countries in these respects and not accept fruit from the Argentine which we can supply from sterling sources or from the Commonwealth? Will not my right hon. Friend give increasing attention to the fact that the trade gap will never be decreased unless steps are taken to stop importation of goods that we can provide?

My hon. Friend will no doubt recognise that this is a very small proportion even of the Australian imports, and is in fact limited by quota.

The hon. Gentleman made reference to the fact that the Australian Government had been informed. Has he received any reply from that Government?

No, Sir, nor was one called for. I simply recorded that the facts had been made known to them.

Is it not a fact that many of the imports to which the hon. Member for Leominster (Mr. Baldwin) rightly objects come from the United States and are made available on condition that we manufacture an equivalent value of aircraft? Has this not had the effect not only of offending some of our Commonwealth friends but of overloading our aircraft industry?

That raises rather wider questions. I was dealing here only with Argentina.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will review the growing imports of German radio and television sets in the light of the increasing unemployment and short-time working in the British radio industry.

No, Sir. The measures which have been taken to reduce home demand apply equally to imported radio and television sets as to those made in this country. It would not be in our interest, as a country vitally dependent on export trade, to re-impose quota restrictions on imports in order to give the radio, or any other, industry protection additional to that provided by the tariff.

Do not the figures which the right hon. Gentleman gave last week show that imports from Germany are rising rapidly, and, in view of the fact that the Government appear to be doing nothing to help the employment situation in the radio industry, will they not review these imports?

I have received no application to do so; in fact, the import duty is the same both ways, the German and our own.

Nevertheless, would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the combined effect of the German and Swedish imports is very serious upon these producers?

There is a 20 per cent. import duty on these sets, and on top of that Purchase Tax is paid, which increases the effect of the duties. Really, our own manufacturers ought to be able to compete on those terms.

Is not the policy of introducing independent television responsible for these importations from Germany which are hurting our manufacturers?

I cannot see why the introduction of independent television should hurt our manufacturers of radio sets.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that knitting wool is sold in large quantities at one-ounce weight which is only approximately one ounce and, as these labels are misleading, if he will take steps under the Merchandise Marks Acts to stop this practice.

No, Sir. I have not received any complaints on this subject, but if the hon. Lady will let me have particulars I shall be glad to examine them.

As this wool is sold in every kind of large store, it will be very difficult for me to send it to him. The right hon. Gentleman will find all the particulars in Command Paper 8219, on weights and measures legislation, where this practice is referred to and the statement follows that "these practices have laid the door wide open to abuse." Will the right hon. Gentleman now take action under the Merchandise Marks Act, or has he deteriorated so far from the days when he introduced the Bill for analgesia?

I was not aware that the hon. Lady had in mind the recommendations of the Hodgson Committee. I am aware of them and, of course, they will be brought into account in any legislation that may be introduced.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the fact that the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research has accurate and detailed knowledge of the flammability of all materials, from 10 to 150 seconds in vertical line of 100 inches, and have figures of merit assessments as to non-flammability, if he will introduce legislation prescribing a system of labelling which will make these results of accurate research known to purchasers of materials.

I am not satisfied that compulsory labelling of textiles in accordance with this test would in itself be helpful to purchasers of materials.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the women of America have forced their Government to label goods, such as materials and dresses, according to flammability and non-flammability? What is the good of the Department of Industrial and Scientific Research having these tests if they are not to be used? They are there to be used. If it is possible to label goods for washability, it is much more important that they should be labelled for flammability.

I am not sure that a lot of labels with complicated formulae on flammability would be of very much help to purchasers. It would depend very much on the material and the purposes for which it was bought. The Fire Research Station is carrying out an investigation into this matter, and I shall await its report with interest.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many gallons of castor oil were sold during the past year; how much it cost; and how much it realised.

Sales of castor oil during the past year which were made in the normal course of managing the stock of this commodity amounted to 1,518 tons, or just over 350,000 gallons. This material was purchased at various times during 1953 at the market price then ruling, and sold by competitive tender at the best prices obtainable.

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman does not think that his Answer is going to be swallowed without protest. Will he bear in mind that it was his suggestion, made last week, that I should put down a Question on this subject, otherwise I should not have dreamt of it? Will he not give figures to show how much has been lost on this transaction, and give some assurance that the waste of public money is not going to continue?

It is not a question of waste of public money. It is the ordinary turnover of public stocks such as has been practised by all Governments, and it has never been the practice of any Government to disclose figures.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received from the Australian Government regarding their official proposals for revising the Ottawa Agreement at the forthcoming Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference.

It is not the practice to disclose the subjects to be discussed at meetings of Commonwealth Prime Ministers.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that it has already been reported in The Times Survey that this is so? In those circumstances, does he not think that he should tell the House of Commons something about it?

I am not in the least responsible for what is reported in The Times.

Although it does not directly arise from the original Question—but it very nearly does—may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman does not think it is about time that at this conference we should give the world a lead by making it quite clear that we no longer expect a developing country to have a favourable balance of trade, because that is nonsense?

I do not think that I can promise that that will be on the agenda of the conference.

Well, it ought to be.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he has had to date with representatives of the film industry about the approaching expiry of film quota legislation and the future of the National Film Finance Corporation.

I have invited the representatives of the industry to put forward their views on future policy to the National Film Finance Corporation who will in turn report to me. I have made it clear, however, that the various sections of the industry are free to express their views directly to the Board of Trade if they so wish. I have not at the moment asked for detailed comments on the film quota legislation.

Having received the views of representatives of the trade—and, presumably, of the trade unions—and having rejected the very reasonable demand for an independent inquiry, is the President of the Board of Trade going to make a statement of policy on behalf of the Government? In view of the importance of long-term programming in the film industry and the fact that the expiry of legislation on the quota and the Finance Corporation is getting very near, it is important that the Government should state their policy.

The object of getting advice is that it will help me to decide what is the correct course to pursue, and in due course and at the appropriate time I shall say what it is.

asked the President of the Board of Trade with which countries of Eastern Europe the United Kingdom now has trade agreements; for what duration; and with which countries no trade agreements have yet been made, and why.

We have trade arrangements with Poland, Bulgaria and Hungary, valid respectively, until the end of this year, the end of next year, and the end of this month. We are negotiating with Hungary about future trade arrangements, and about a debt settlement, and also with Czechoslovakia about both trade and debts. We are expecting a Roumanian delegation in the near future, also to discuss trade and debts.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in view of the need to find new and expanding markets for exports, it is important to extend these agreements as quickly as possible?

The agreements do not cover a very wide area of trade, but they deal with quotas for the exchange of less essential things on both sides and, I think, perform a very useful purpose.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he has taken to assist firms on trading estates on the North-East Development Area producing electrical equipment and furniture.

I do not know what form of assistance the hon. Member has in mind. Tenants of Board of Trade factories in the North East and other Development Areas benefit, of course, from favourable rental terms.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that where there is this widespread redundancy the Government can do what has been done on previous occasions—place Government contracts and endeavour to avoid this redundancy spreading?

I do not think that the situation of demand in this country at present would justify it being artificially inflated by putting forward Government contracts.

Does the Government policy of giving priority of contracts to firms in Development Areas still stand—all other things being equal?

The ordinary arrangements still obtain.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will consider increasing the import duty on manufactured bentonites in order to help the British industry.

There are procedures whereby interests concerned can apply for changes in protective duties. I have received no application for an increased protective duty on manufactured bentonites.

Surely the Minister could help firms in this country by slightly increasing the duty on manufactured bentonite, which is the same as that on non-manufactured bentonite?

If I have an application for increased duty in this regard I shall, of course, examine it in the ordinary way.

Can we know what bentonite is?

It is a substance used for moulds in foundries.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage of dollar imports were subject to import licensing in 1954 and 1955, respectively.

To make this calculation with the precision necessary for a valid comparison would involve considerable labour and time. According to calculations previously made, however, using imports in 1953 as a base, 50 per cent. of imports on private account from Canada and the United States of America were subject to specific import licensing at the end of 1954 and 44 per cent. at the end of 1955.

Do not these figures, which show a very considerable proportion of the imports to be still subject to import licensing, make complete and utter nonsense of the argument of the right hon. Gentleman and of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that any extension of import licensing must involve rationing?

No, I do not think that they do. I think one could make marginal alterations in liberalisation at any time, but the question one has to answer is whether one wants to go forward towards freedom or backwards towards restriction and control, as advocated by the right hon. Gentleman.

Since this Question relates to dollar imports, and since hon. Gentlemen on both sides of the House consider that a great number of dollars are being wasted on inessentials—including dollar coarse grains—would he not say that it is more a question of forward to a dollar crisis once again rather than the way in which he put it?

It was happily phrased.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been called to the boycott organised by the Tobacco Trade Association against retailers who sell cigarettes manufactured by independent firms; and what action he proposes to take.

I understand that some members of the Tobacco Trade Association have boycotted a retailer who sold a brand of cigarette associated with a gift coupon scheme. Agreements embodying a boycott of this kind will, under the Restrictive Trade Practices Bill, be subject to registration and to examination by the Restrictive Practices Court.

May I inform the firm—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—I am asking the President whether I can inform the firm which is subject to this victimisation that he will take action within three months after the passing of the Restrictive Trade Practices Bill.

No. I think that would tie me down to put what I cannot think is an important or far-reaching restriction in the forefront of all others, and I do not think that would be the right sort of priority.

Can the right hon. Gentleman name any date by which he will undertake to take some action on this particular practice?

Neither I nor the right hon. Gentleman under his scheme for dealing with restrictive practices could lay down a timetable for dealing with them all.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the situation in the tobacco trade is approaching something very near a monopoly and that if it is supported and buttressed, as it is, by the Tobacco Trade Association, which has quite extensive powers over small retailers, some mischief could result if that power were improperly used? Will he keep the whole matter under observation?

asked the President of the Board of Trade why exports have not expanded consistently with the increase in production since 1953.

Between 1953 and 1955 the volume of exports in fact increased at about the same rate as industrial production, though not sufficiently to meet the needs of our balance of payments. The reason we did not do better was mainly due to excessive home demand.

Is not the excessive home demand entirely due to the Government's policy? Will the President not give further consideration to the very reasonable proposition put by the Opposition to help the export trade?

No. The excessive home demand is due to a large number of factors, including wage rises and many other matters of that kind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received from the leather industry about subsidised imports into this country; and what reply he has made to them.

I have received no representations within recent months about subsidised imports of leather, except in relation to imports of kid leathers from Germany. I have replied that the only remaining official German Export Aid Scheme terminated at the end of 1955.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that industry itself at least has some observations on this matter, not only about Germany but about France? If he has had no representations, I can only hope that, as a result of the Question, some representations will be made to him.

I have had those representations, and that is the answer which I have given.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that German leather is being sold in the United Kingdom market at prices measurably below those prevailing in Germany? What inquiries has he made into the causes of this disparity?

I have not had that representation, but I am willing to study any facts which my hon. Friend puts before me.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the expenditure in dollars on the import of sheet steel for the motor industry during the last twelve months to the nearest convenient date.

Imports in the twelve months ended 31st January, 1956, from the dollar area of the type of sheet steel mainly used by the motor industry were £17·4 million valued c.i.f. No information is available to show what proportion of these imports was used by the motor industry.

Is it not very serious that we should be spending so many dollars on imported steel and then reselling so much of the finished product on the home market? Will the right hon. Gentleman not endeavour to relate the import of hard-currency steel to the export performance of the consumer?

I think the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay) and I are agreed that no allocations scheme for steel ought to be introduced.

While the right hon. Gentleman is right in saying that no one has suggested a detailed steel allocations scheme, does he not agree that he should have accepted the proposal made from this side of the House last June that the motor car manufacturers should be sent for and that he should point out to them how much sheet steel they were importing and ask them to make special efforts to increase their exports as a condition of receiving this sheet steel? Secondly, does he not agree that it would have been reasonable during these years of excessive expansion of the motor car industry to have fixed a quota for sales in the home market?

I quite agree that we should always impress upon manufacturers the importance of exports, but the point here is that we are all agreed that no allocations scheme for sheet steel should be introduced. That is the answer to the hon. Member's Question.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is still talking nonsense? All I said was that I expressed no opinion about this matter, one way or the other.

I think the right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues ought to make up their minds about it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what bodies he consults before allocating Treasury grants to certain musical colleges.

None, Sir The colleges of music which receive grants-in-aid from the Treasury are the four Royal Colleges. Their reputation is undoubted, and their need for financial support is examined each year by the Treasury.

In view of the fact that this particular school is of the highest standing and is accepted by all the opera companies and leading people in the opera world as quite invaluable, will he not consider making such a small grant as that for which the Governors asked—small by comparison with the £60,000 received by the other institutions? Will he not consider these applications on their merits?

No school is referred to in the Question. If the right hon. Gentleman will give me an opportunity to answer Question No. 36, which he has on the Paper, I might then be able to deal with his supplementary question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer on what grounds he has turned down the application of the governors of the Opera School for an annual grant of £1,500.

This school gives specialised professional training and my right hon. Friend considers that its training is best judged, and if necessary supported, by the opera companies who may benefit from it. He has in mind the large financial support already given by the Government to opera companies in this country.

Is there any difference between a school which specialises in musical training for opera and the other schools which deal with musical training in general? Surely this is a very important branch of musical training and, logically, there can be no ground for saying that one type of school shall have a grant whereas another type of school shall have no grant at all. This is a good and important school. Will not the right hon. Gentleman reconsider his refusal in the case of this school?

I think there is a difference. Grants to the musical colleges are given to the four old-established Royal Colleges. The Opera School was founded about eight years ago. I understand that is trains about twenty-five or thirty students entirely for opera. In view of the very substantial Government aid given to the opera companies, it appears to my right hon. Friend that any assistance to the Opera School should come from that quarter.

Does any of the money go to Scottish musical colleges?

The Royal Scottish Academy of Music receives grants according to the normal Goschen formula.

asked the Chancellor of othe Exchequer whether, in preparing his forthcoming Budget, he will arrange for persons who are totally disabled to get their post-war credits refunded on reaching the age of fifty-five.

I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's Budget statement.

Will the Minister bear in mind that in the week during which I tabled this Question I had two letters from constituents who are in this unfortunate category? As the concession does not amount to much, will he urge his right hon. Friend the Chancellor to grant it?

I will certainly draw my right hon. Friend's attention to what the hon. Member has said.

The right hon. Gentleman said that he cannot anticipate the Chancellor's Budget statement. Taken in conjunction with his answer last week about advertising, when he indicated that the Chancellor's mind was closed on that matter, does it mean that the Chancellor's mind is open at any rate on this proposal?

My right hon. Friend authorised me to make a definite statement in answer to the Question about tax relief for advertising expenses last week, and he also authorised me, in the perfectly normal manner, to give an answer today on this subject of post-war credits that I could not anticipate his Budget statement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has yet reached any conclusions with regard to the recommendations of the committee on the taxation treatment of provisions for retirement.

I must ask my hon. Friend to await my right hon. Friend's Budget statement.

While his right hon. Friend is preparing his statement, will the Financial Secretary impress upon him that there is this section of middle-class persons, self-employed persons and professional persons, which has no opportunity of saving, such as is available to wage earners generally?

I myself, on behalf of my right hon. Friend, received a very authoritative deputation a few days ago from the accountancy profession and both branches of the legal profession, and I can assure my hon. Friend that both the Chancellor and I are fully seized of this issue.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the question of this Committee's Report has been raised over the last three or four years with the Chancellor, and can the right hon. Gentleman give some hope of relief, not only to the class referred to by the hon. Member for Morecambe and Lonsdale (Sir I. Fraser), but to working people who are in receipt of pensions, having as much as 4s. or 5s. a week deducted?

The right hon. Gentleman referred to "three or four years" ago, but the Report of the Committee was actually published two years ago. I must say that I should be surprised if my right hon. Friend the Chancellor could make his Budget statement this year without including some mention, positive or negative, of the subject.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in carrying out the proposed further reductions in the Civil Service, he will give special consideration to ex-Service men in non-established posts.

If temporary staff have to be discharged on redundancy it will be done under the arrangements laid down in the National Whitley Agreement on the order of discharge of temporary staff on redundancy. This Agreement incorporates the long standing pledge that ex-Service men of the 1914–18 war shall have preference for retention in temporary Government employment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that since the October Budget cars have been stockpiled in all parts of the country; that since he increased the Bank Rate this position has become worse; and if he will take steps in his forthcoming Budget to aid the motor industry thus affected by Government policy.

I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's Budget statement.

That is cold comfort to the motor industry. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that under the Labour Government the motor industry exported two-thirds of its production, but that under this Government its exports have fallen to less than half; is he further aware that this redundancy and short-time working in the motor industry will soon push up the unit costs of production and make exporting still more difficult; and is that what the Government have in mind?

We cannot debate the motor industry now.

The Government have not got anything in mind.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the increases in the Bank Rate are causing hardship to the non-provided schools; and whether he will, in framing his Budget, consider granting reliefs to such schools.

I cannot anticipate my right hon. Friend's Budget statement.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his mechanical reply will cause very grave disquiet in the minds of the managers of denominational schools; and is he further aware that this impact of an increased Bank Rate is imposing an unjust and iniquitous burden on the managers of non-provided schools, who are very anxious to maintain freedom of conscience and get the debts off their shoulders as soon as possible?

The hon. Gentleman must not mind my making a traditional reply at this season of the year.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this high Bank Rate will altogether arrest, and is arresting, the building of non-provided schools? Is it not perfectly possible for the Ministry of Education, under his direction, to make revolving credits available for them at fixed rates of interest? As this has been done in some cases, why cannot it be done generally?

Hardship in the educational field, if there is any, is primarily a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Education.

Will the hon. Gentleman bring it to the notice of the Chancellor?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has noted the public disquiet at the proposal to demolish the buildings of the Imperial Institute; and whether he will take advice from other architects so as to ensure that the tower and façade are not destroyed.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury how many architects or firms of architects were consulted as to the feasibility of retaining intact the southern façade and campanile of the Imperial Institute in the proposed rebuilding of the site.

The plans for the development of the South Kensington rectangle, recently submitted to the London County Council, were prepared by the Imperial College and their architects, Messrs. Norman and Dawbarn, who co-operated fully in a detailed examination of the possibilities of finding means to retain the Collcutt building. The development is to be the subject of further discussions between the architect of the London County Council and the College authorities and their architects.

The Financial Secretary having mentioned the name of the London County Council, would he bear in mind that this tower and façade occupies only three-quarters of an acre out of the 16-acre site; and as all of us are anxious that there should be as many places as possible for science students, would he ask the help of the L.C.C. to get another site immediately so as to make certain that something can be done without any ill-influence to further education?

There are further Questions down about the amount of land occupied by the Colcutt building, and also about the position of the L.C.C. in this matter, so I ought not to anticipate my Answers to those Questions.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that public opinion would be better reassured that the claims of science and amenity were reconciled to the greatest possible extent if a second opinion could be obtained?

I recognise my hon. Friend's point, but I must stress the fact that this is a university development and the Government have no more right to give directions to the Imperial College about its choice of architect than they would have the right to give directions to a college of, say, Oxford or Cambridge as to the architect it should employ?

Is it true that the Government took a decision—and announced it—on this issue without consulting the London County Council first, although the Council is the planning authority?

It was not for the Government to consult the London County Council. The Imperial College has submitted its plans to the planning authority.

Could my right hon. Friend explain how, as an Act of Parliament is in any case necessary, it is possible to disclaim responsibility for these matters?

This is a matter of responsibility for the choice of architect. I quite agree that legislation will be necessary, and all those matters will come before Parliament then.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, whatever is the final conclusion, a decision really must be reached very quickly indeed so that there is no further holding up of the development of technological education?

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for stressing the importance of final conclusions on this matter at an early date.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the total cost of the Imperial Institute building when it was erected; from what sources the funds were made available; and what would be the equivalent today of this sum in money terms.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what consultations there have been with the Commissioners of the Exhibition of 1851 or with other bodies which donated land or substantial sums of money for the building of the Imperial Institute, now that it is proposed to pull the building down.

About £429,000 was contributed by public subscription, but I regret that no information is available to me about the source or amounts of individual subscriptions. The amount spent on building the Institute, including plant, fittings and furniture, was £354,753. The present day equivalent, in money terms, would be about £1·7 million.

As the sum of money approaches, in today's value, nearly £2 million, which is quite considerable, should that not make the Financial Secretary and his right hon. Friend think again whether it is possible to achieve what we all desire, which is a decision almost at once, or as soon as possible, to house as many students as we can in this place without pulling down the tower and façade and have another site earmarked at once for further students?

I think we all wish that there should be the right outcome in respect of this very difficult matter. I must point out to the hon. Gentleman that, when he quotes a figure of nearly £2 million, one also has to take into account, if one is calculating that in economic terms, that the existing building is very wasteful of space, is inconvenient internally and does sterilise a considerable area of valuable ground.

While it might not be in order to ask whether the Royal family has been consulted, does the right hon. Gentleman not think it would be desirable for some statement to be made on that matter, as this is a very personal memorial; and does he not consider it incongruous for a Conservative Administration to agree to the demolition of a building which is a memorial to a very significant name in British history, as well as to a very great Queen?

I hope that the hon. Lady will forgive me if I say nothing about the Royal family in this connection. The Imperial Institute, which is itself a living memorial, is unquestionably to be carried on and given new and purpose-built premises at Government expense.

Has the right hon. Gentleman observed the remarks in another place of the noble Lord, Lord Beveridge, who for many years worked in the Imperial Institute, and whose opinion is that, as a building, it is a cut-rate job, that it is quite useless as a place in which to work, cannot be used for any purpose at all and has absolutely no value?

I had the privilege of listening to a great part of the debate in another place, and there is clearly—

We should not refer to debates in another place held during the current Session.

I thought it was in order, Mr. Speaker, to refer to remarks made in another place so long as one paraphrased those remarks and did not actually use the words used by a noble Lord.

It is not in order to refer to debates in another place. The only exception is when a Minister in another place makes a statement on behalf of the Government.

asked the Prime Minister if he can yet make a statement in respect of the investigations of Departmental Ministers in regard to Government surplus stock offered at public auctions.

I have asked my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to consider the outcome of the Departmental inquiries which are being made and, in consultation with the other Ministers concerned, to report on the general procedure for the disposal of surplus service stores.

Arising out of that reply, does the Prime Minister recollect that on 1st March, in respect of the sale of nearly a quarter million gallons of surplus paint, he gave as an excuse in this House that it was special paint purchased for the war in Korea and became surplus when peace came to Korea? Is he aware that the surplus amounted to 4,800 gallons? Was it not misleading the House to talk about a quarter million gallons? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the strange coincidence that a Government Department which has never purchased paint before has purchased 1,500 gallons, with a saving to the taxpayer?

I have asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to review this question. If the hon. Member has further detailed Questions to put on the matter, perhaps he will put them to my right hon. Friend or to the Department handling the matter.

May I ask the Prime Minister when the inquiry is likely to be completed?

I should not like to pledge myself to a date. We have to review the practice which has been established for some time, and see in what way it needs amending. I think the Financial Secretary has already made an interim report to my right hon. Friend on the problems which have to be met. I would rather not give an actual date.

asked the Prime Minister how many Departments are concerned in the sale of surplus strategic stocks; and how other Departments are informed of these surplus stocks before they are sold to private buyers.

The Board of Trade will be predominantly concerned. The Admiralty and the Ministry of Supply may also be concerned. Surplus stocks will be offered to other Departments before they are sold outside.

Is the Prime Minister aware that from the Answer which I received from the President of the Board of Trade to Question No. 15 today, it is quite impossible to find how much money is being wasted as a result of this disposal? Will the right hon. Gentleman take it upon himself to instruct the President of the Board of Trade or to take such steps as are necessary to enable the House and the taxpayers to find how much is being wasted as a result of these disposals?

I think that probably the reason why the hon. and gallant Member could not find the amount is that the action has not yet been taken. As it is decided which stocks will be run down the Board of Trade will give other Departments a list of those commodities so that they may know which they are.

That does not answer the Question.