asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the indignation of the silk industry concerning recent advertisement for a fabric, the name of which has been sent to him, in which it is claimed that this material wears like silk at a third of the price, in breach of the Merchandise Marks Acts; and what action he proposes to take in the matter, under the Merchandise Marks Acts, following the evidence submitted to him by the hon. Member for Coventry, South, on 1st March last.

I have received no complaints from the silk industry on this subject, and I do not find either in the advertisement or in the evidence submitted by the hon. Lady grounds for action under the Merchandise Marks Acts.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many complaints have been made by the silk industry, if they have not come to him? Further, after what he has just told me, may I ask him whether it is the policy of the Government that claims about the wearing properties of materials which have been proved false do not infringe the Merchandise Marks Acts?

I will look at any complaints put before me, but we must not complain too much if British textile manufacturers do praise their own products. I think they are entitled to do so.

Is the right hon. Gentleman also aware that I sent him the materials, that one material was silk, and that the price of the cheaper material was not one-third of that, but much more than half? Does he consider that a true statement?

I thought that this Question had to do with quality, but if there was some statement about price, shall be glad to look into it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the concern felt by the British Dental Association at the continuing display of misleading advertisements by some toothpaste manufacturers; and if he will take action, under the Merchandise Marks Acts, following the second submission of evidence made to him by the hon. Member for Coventry, South, on 5th March last.

I thank the hon. Lady for the evidence which she sent me on 5th March. It is not, however, of itself sufficient upon which to base a prosecution. Further steps are being taken to see whether all the available evidence justifies the institution of proceedings.

While being grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for the crumbs of comfort given in the last part of his reply, may I ask him if he is aware that these Questions in the House and his consideration are already having some effect on these advertisements, and that we on these benches would welcome further action?

I am glad that we are being so successful.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he will take to ensure that the stocks of pottery which are being built up in the City of Stoke-on-Trent and the stocks of manufactured china in Longton are used to increase our export trade.

I have no reason to believe that the pottery manufacturers are not continuing to take advantage of every export opportunity that presents itself. The services of my Department are, of course, constantly available to give them all possible assistance.

Is the President aware that, as a result of the recent policy of the Government, even the best of the manufacturers are having to build up huge stocks rather than put their operatives on short time, and that they are hoping that the Government will take action to help them to dispose of those stocks? What action does the President intend taking?

I am aware that there is some short time in the pottery industry, and that these stocks are tending to mount. The situation differs in different parts of the industry, and, as I have said, the services of my Department are available for any export help that I can give.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that employment and standards of the workers in the pottery industry, and the large-scale modernisation and investments of that industry, depend upon the maintenance of the industry's traditional foreign markets; and whether he will take urgent action to safeguard those markets.

I am aware that the well-being of the pottery industry depends on the maintenance of its foreign markets. These markets can only be safeguarded by a combination of the expansionist commercial policy pursued by the Government and competitiveness on the part of the industry.

That reply does not get us very far, as the President himself knows. Is he also aware that we are running into great difficulty as a result of the intervention of other competitors? Has not the time arrived when the President should consider taking some concrete and constructive action to assist the industry to maintain our traditional markets?

I think the best help we can give is to try to hold the markets as widely open as possible so that the pottery industry can take advantage of them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he proposes to take in order to relieve unemployment in the motor cycle industry.

Figures of employment in the motor cycle industry are not available. I understand, however, that there has been some marginal decrease in the number of people employed in this industry. I do not accept the implication that a given level of employment in a particular industry should necessarily be maintained.

Nor does anyone else, but does not this mean that, as in the motor car industry, it is a case of "no interest, no action, no policy, no anything"?

No, Sir, nor am I at all clear what action the hon. Gentleman is proposing.

Is it not a fact that the motor cycle industry is for the most part centred in the Midlands and that in the Midlands area there are at present 46,000 vacancies for jobs out of a total insured population of two million?

It is true that there are a number of unfilled vacancies in the Midlands area, but these matters were widely debated in the discussion in the House on Tuesday.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that the Government have no responsibility in this matter and that it is for the employers to push the workers around?

What I said was that no Government, surely, of any political persuasion, can ever accept the position that the number of men in a particular industry should always stay the same. That would lead to the freezing of the whole of British industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the Eireann Government have placed a tariff of 50 per cent. on cables exported from the United Kingdom; what restrictions are placed on imports of cables from Eire; and what representations he has made in this matter.

On a point of order. This Question refers to Eire and the Eireann Government. Should it not be the Republic of Ireland?

As long as the sense is intelligible the words are not so very important.

The following is the reply. Ever since 1934 there has been a duty of 50 per cent. on certain classes of electric cables and wires imported into the Irish Republic from any source. There are no restrictions on imports into the United Kingdom of cables from the Republic. No representations have been made on this matter.

May I ask my right hon. Friend why not?

Representations have not been made because this is a long-standing part of the Anglo-Irish Trade Agreement, and in fact our exports in 1955 were £229,000 against imports from them of only £18,000.

Were these arrangements bound under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade?

I think the Republic of Southern Ireland, or Eire as it is called, is not a member of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what preferences are extended to United Kingdom imports by the Eireann Government under the recent official pronouncements; and to what goods they apply.

For most goods 12½ per cent.; I am sending details to my hon. Friend.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that these recent impositions of duty are in accordance with the Anglo-Eire Trade Agreement? Is there any intention of altering the United Kingdom tariffs on imports from Eire?

These recent moves were dictated by Eire's balance of pay- ments position. As far as I can judge, she has made a real attempt to keep within the terms of our agreement with her.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what information he has of overseas visitors to Wales during the past 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

I regret that there are no official statistics. I understand, however, that the British Travel & Holidays Association has estimated that the number of people from overseas who visited Wales in 1955 was of the order of 100,000.

In Wales, as in other parts of the United Kingdom, the tourist industry is potentially one of the best earners of foreign currency. Can my right hon. Friend therefore say what his Department can do to help the Welsh Tourist Board, financially or otherwise, and further, can he explain why the Secretary of State for Scotland was able to give very precise figures relating to the Scottish Tourist Board? Why is there not a similar interest taken in this matter in England and in Wales?

The British Travel and Holidays Association has given these estimates—I emphasise that they are no more than estimates—in the case of both Scotland and Wales. I would not vouch for their accuracy, but they are the best estimates which can be given.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to encourage the production of titanium in this country in view of the fact that this material is in short supply and stocks are required to be imported from dollar sources.

The hon. Member's statement that titanium is in short supply is not correct, United Kingdom output is more than sufficient to meet our needs, and I understand the producers are actively engaged on developing exports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will amend the present practice which prevents the annual dislosure of the financial loss incurred in selling stocks held by his Department.

Stocks of materials held by the Board of Trade are of two kinds—those remaining from trading operations formerly conducted by the Government and those held as a strategic reserve. Financial results in connection with the liquidation of trading operations are published annually by order of the House in the Trading Accounts and Balance Sheets of trading or commercial services conducted by Government Departments, together with the report of the Comptroller and Auditor General thereon. In the case of strategic stocks, purchases and sales are undertaken not for commercial, but for strategic, reasons and an annual statement in commercial terms of the financial results would therefore be inappropriate. The actual expenditure year by year from money voted for this purpose and the receipts taken into the Exchequer are, however, shown in the annual Appropriation Accounts.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, but is he aware that it does not answer the Question? Will he admit or deny that he has lost vast sums of money in selling stocks held by his Department? Is he further aware that any Minister who sells 350,000 gallons of castor oil and calls it a normal turnover must be regarded as a bit of a menace?

I think the answer sets out clearly what has been the policy of all Governments in dealing with these stocks.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not now be a little more forthcoming with the House about the strategic stocks? Does he recall that when asked about this a few weeks ago he gave a very vague and evasive answer? Since then he has announced very large sales from the strategic stockpile without, as far as I know, informing the House. Since we all recognise the importance of the strategic security considerations, will he, in turn, not recognise that these are now passing when he is selling these large quantities? Will he make all the financial figures available?

If the right hon. Gentleman looks at the White Paper on Defence he will see our policy with regard to strategic stocks set out there. These sales are in pursuance of that general policy, but I am not prepared, any more than any other Government have been prepared, to disclose details of these sales.

Since the right hon. Gentleman has issued statements to the Press in the last few days giving detailed figures of the quantities to be sold, running into very many millions of pounds, no security consideration can be involved. Will he not have another look at this to see whether he cannot give the House fuller information, after the transactions have been carried out, in order that the House may judge the commercial and financial results of his action?

I am quite prepared to give the House all the information which is normally given to it as a matter of practice on the subject of strategic stocks, but I think the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that it is a matter upon which information cannot be given with quite the same freedom as on other topics.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent it is now the policy of Her Majesty's Government to conduct inquiries into the distributive costs of consumer goods generally, in view of the decision to order an inquiry into the distributive costs of coal.

The Government do not intend to institute inquiries unless there is good reason for doing so in particular cases.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that they seem to have rather a selective system? Is he aware that we on these benches have been pressing for some time for an inquiry into distributive costs on some foods? Will he say whether or not it will be the Government's policy to have such an inquiry?

The Government have no intention of instituting a roving inquiry over all distribution costs. If there is a special case in some particular instance, that would be considered, as in the case of coal or the Committee on Horticultural Marketing, which covers fruit and vegetables and which will include some investigation of distribution costs. We are not contemplating some general inquiry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how exports of motor cars, as far as the figures are available in 1956, compare with the same period in 1955.

The value of exports of new motor cars for the first two months of 1956 was £17·9 million compared with £22·7 million for the same period in 1955.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether these doleful statistics are due to the colossal collapse of certain European markets? Are losses likely to follow in Commonwealth countries like Australia, where motor production is being developed on the basis of automatic processes?

Very shortly, I think two factors have combined to have that effect—partly competition from Western Germany in the European markets, as the hon. Member rightly says, and partly the Australian import restrictions.

Do I understand that the Minister is prepared to leave this situation of declining imports just to the industries? Would he not consider again hearing the views of the National Advisory Council for the Motor Manufacturing Industry? At least for once he might be of some assistance.

I shall be very happy to hear the views of the National Advisory Council for the Motor Manufacturing Industry or anybody in the motor car industry.

Can my right hon. Friend form any judgment on what would be the effect on sales overseas of the products of the British motor industry if prices were, for example, 2½per cent. less, 5 per cent. less and 10 per cent. less? If not, will he do so?

I think the best judges on that are those people who are concerned in selling motor cars.

Will not even those very gloomy figures stir the President into some sort of action?

I am not quite sure what sort of action the right hon. Member has in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage of the extra cars produced in 1955 was exported.

The rate of production of cars in 1955 was 19 per cent. higher than in 1954. Exports of cars were 2 per cent. higher.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that of the extra cars produced in 1955 about 5½ per cent. were exported? Does that not indicate the growing difficulties in the export field?

However one measures these percentages, it is true that the increase in production was substantially larger than the increase in exports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many cinemas failed to achieve their quota of British films last year; and what action he proposes to take with defaulters.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler) on 20th March.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I have consulted that Answer, and it does not give any information about the small cinemas, to which my hon. Friend referred in his original Question'? Would the President take a special look at the smaller cinemas and smaller circuits, which appear to be the main defaulters? Will he investigate whether there are not special difficulties which ought to be overcome?

As the hon. Member knows, in assessing whether an offence has been committed under the Act the kind of circumstance and the degree of competition in a particular town are taken into account.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the worst defaulters in that regard is the Independent Television Authority? Will he consult the Postmaster-General with a view to putting an end to that practice?

Fortunately that does not fall within my field of responsibility.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what official backing is to be given to exhibitors of British goods at the St. Erik's Fair, Stockholm, Sweden, and the International Fair at Posznan, Poland.

We are considering the possibility of organising a display of British scientific instruments at the St. Erik's Fair, Stockholm, in co-operation with the manufacturers concerned. At the International Fair at Posznan an official from the British Embassy at Warsaw will be present to give advice to British exhibitors with whom we are discussing how best to co-ordinate the design of their stands and the décor of the British section.

Whilst thanking the President for taking more energetic action in the matter of trade fairs—thanks to the pressure from this side of the House—may I ask if he thinks it wise to allow just one section of British industry to be supported by the Board of Trade at the St. Erik's Fair, rather than having a wider representation with full Government backing?

I appreciate the real interest of the right hon. Member in this particular fair. This is a difficult question, but it does depend rather on what sections of British industry are prepared to exhibit. We may have this offer—it is not firm yet—from the instrument manufacturers, and I think we should make use of it.

I do not want to put forward the claims of the promoters of St. Erik's Fair, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware that for many years British industry was organised to participate in that exhibition? Will the President give further consideration to their proposals?

I am prepared to give consideration to any proposals for a good exhibit, but whether a particular industry chooses to go into it is a matter for that industry.

Is not one of the difficulties about the Posznan Fair the fact that the currency is linked to the rouble, which gives a totally artificial idea of value and involves British manufacturers in considerable expense?

Yes, that is one of the difficulties in Posznan.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will refuse to grant import licences for the Italian films, "Maggia Verde" and "Principessa di Canaria," which contain scenes depicting cruelty to animals which were especially shot for this purpose.

The import of cinematograph films is on open general licence from Italy. But in any case it is not the policy of Her Majesty's Government to use import restriction powers for censorship purposes. The Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act, 1937, however, makes it an offence to exhibit any film if the preparation of the scenes represented in it involves cruelty to animals.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in one of these films a horse with a dummy rider on its back was driven over some cliffs and killed when it fell 200 feet on to rocks, and that the director of the film was later fined in the Italian courts for cruelty? Can some action be taken to prevent that being shown in this country?

It would not be for me, under my import licensing powers, to deal with that, but under the Cinematograph Films (Animals) Act action could be taken. Questions on the administration of that Act are matters for the Home Secretary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what countries have formally notified their intention of becoming members of the proposed Organisation for Trade Co-operation.

The Agreement setting up the Organisation has been signed by the United Kingdom, India, Belgium, Greece and Haiti. The Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland, the Federal Republic of Germany, Chile and Turkey have signed "ad referendum," the Netherlands "subject to ratification" and the United States "subject to approval."

asked the President of the Board of Trade the estimated annual cost of maintaining the proposed Organisation for Trade Co-operation; and what will be the United Kingdom's share of this cost.

The present annual cost of running the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade is £160,000, of which our share is £23,200. There is no firm estimate of the comparable figures for the Organisation for Trade Co-operation, but it is expected that they will be of the same order, although possibly somewhat larger.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the adverse trade balance with the United States of America, he will institute a careful examination of our imports there-from, with a view to encouraging more imports from the British Empire and Commonwealth and less from the United States of America.

Much the greater part of our current imports from the United States consist of basic foodstuffs, raw materials and goods for industry. It is part of the policy of working towards a system of freer trade and payments, to which all Commonwealth Governments have subscribed, that traders and manufacturers should have as free access to all sources of supply as the balance of payments will permit.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that our adverse trade balance with the United States of America last year was no less than £222 million in value, and that our imports from the United States increased, as compared with 1954, by nearly 50 per cent., whereas our exports to the United States increased by only about 20 per cent.? Does he regard that as satisfactory?

No, but our balance of payments problem is primarily due to excessive internal demand and excessive imports over exports, not only from the United States but from other countries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this did not happen under the Labour Government—indeed the reverse? May I ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will give any consideration to the proposition made from this side of the House in the debate on unemployment for considering the establishment of a Commonwealth development corporation?

I think it would be too provocative if I started saying what happened under the Labour Government.

May I ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will once more examine the price at which we are selling whisky to the United States? The United States pays only 10 cents. a bottle more than it paid before the war, at 1 dollar and 10 cents., but everything from the United States costs three times as much as it did. The whole thing is a complete swindle and racket, and the President of the Board of Trade ought to look into it.

I am always happy to look into the price of whisky, but whisky sellers in this country have some incentive to get the best price they can.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the basic foodstuffs which he mentioned are obtainable from other countries which are prepared, willing and anxious to trade with us?

My hon. Friend will recognise that Commonwealth Governments, including Canada and Australia, have subscribed to the general principle of allowing the freest access to world markets, subject to the balance of payments position.

Is it no longer the policy of the present Government, as it was of the previous Government, to substitute non-dollar for dollar imports wherever possible?

The policy of the previous Government was indicated by their signature to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, to which we have freely subscribed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the shortage and high prices of vegetables, he will remove the tariff on vegetables imported from abroad.

No, Sir. I understand that the present shortages are purely temporary and largely due to the recent severe weather. The tariff is not intended to be used as a short-term instrument to remedy temporary shortages or gluts due to natural causes.

Arising out of that Answer, I wish to ask the President if he is aware that there is a serious shortage of fresh vegetables which many families cannot afford to buy at their present prices? Would not lifting the tariff enable families to buy fresh vegetables at prices they can afford? Why is the right hon. Gentleman so bitterly opposed to housewives paying reasonable prices?

I am aware that both in this country and, more particularly perhaps, on the Continent of Europe, there has been difficulty in this matter, due to the severe weather, but the tariff instrument is not suitable for quick adjustments of supplies in the varying conditions of different months.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the growers of vegetables in the Vale of Evesham and other districts have suffered very great losses in the last winter, due to the unusually severe weather conditions, and are relying on this tariff as a means of protection for the industry?

I am aware that both consumers and producers have suffered from the severe weather and the shortage of vegetables.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Britain's share of the markets for imports into Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and the Colonial Territories as a whole has declined, while that of the United States of America has increased; and what steps he proposes to take in order to check this tendency.

There has been such a tendency in some, but not all, of the markets to which my hon. Friend refers. I am hopeful that the measures recently taken by the Government will help to improve our competitive position in these and other overseas markets.

Does my right hon. Friend consider that the measures announced by the Government will do everything to remedy the situation? Would he not agree that if we were to encourage our importers to buy more produce from Empire countries, the Empire countries might be encouraged to buy more of our exports?

The steps recently taken by the Government are calculated to deal with inflation and make us more competitive in these markets.

While I endorse the President's statement that the previous Government signed the General Agreement, which the present Government have maintained, does he not recall that under the previous Government's administration the proportion of Commonwealth trade considerably increased as regards both imports and exports? Will the right hon. Gentleman now say whether, within the General Agreement, it is or is not the policy of the Government to increase the proportion of our trade with the Commonwealth?

The right hon. Gentleman knows the terms of the General Agreement as well as I do.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now permit carpet manufacturers and others to import on private account, independent of the Jute Control, such jute manufactured goods, including yarn, from India and Pakistan and elsewhere, as are required for carpet manufacture and other manufactures in the United Kingdom.

I would refer my hon. Friend to reply which I gave to him on 14th February.

That was a very unsatisfactory reply. Is it not the fact that if British carpet manufacturers and others engaged in similar industries were allowed direct access to supplies from India and Pakistan of jute manufactured goods and yarn, they could, therefore, buy more cheaply and assist their own export prices for British manufactured carpets?

I am sensible that there might be advantages in altering this policy but there would be substantial disadvantages for Dundee and manufacturers here. I am not in a position to tell my hon. Friend that we propose to change our policy.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the suggestion contained in the Question would bring ruin to Dundee and the surrounding area? Will he take what steps he can to stop my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) from asking such tactless questions?

The reply to the second part of that supplementary question is "No, Sir."

Is it the correct interpretation of my hon. and gallant Friend's supplementary question that he is now in favour of nationalisation?

We are getting very far from the Question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he takes to encourage the buying of British manufactured opencast coal-mining machinery from British specialist manufacturers before authorising to the National Coal Board dollar funds for purchasing equivalent United States machinery.

Before issuing an import licence for dollar machinery to any applicant, I satisfy myself that, on the facts available to me at the time, no British alternative offering roughly similar advantages is available.

Is my right hon. Friend not aware that 3 million dollars were recently authorised for two giant drag-line excavators from America, one of which is now lying with its back broken on the North-East Coast and the other is out of commission, and that at the time these were ordered by the Coal Board and the dollars were authorised by his Department, British equivalents were available from Ransome and Rapier at Ipswich?

While no one would question the quality of any alternative that might have been available, there was a question of delivery date which had to be considered carefully and weighed against the amount of coal which could be got by getting these machines a little earlier.

It is scarcely necessary for me to declare my interest. While I agree with the Minister that at the time these machines were ordered the question of delivery was of considerable importance, is he aware that the reason why the Coal Board was reduced to the ridiculous position of having to buy inferior machinery in America was that the Ministry of Fuel and Power could not make up its mind about how much opencast coal it wanted? Consequently, there was not sufficient time to negotiate for the site that the Coal Board wished to open and the Board had to buy this machinery in a hurry, at great cost, when much better machinery was available in this country, if only the Board had made up its mind in time.

When the case came to me I had to make a judgment on it according to the delivery position at the time, and I made my judgment to the best of my ability.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what effect upon exports from the United Kingdom has been produced by recent Australian import restrictions, notably of British-manufactured carpets and motor cars; and, in view of short-time working in these industries, what representations he is making to the Australian authorities against further such import restrictions.

As Australian import licences are valid for twelve months, the effect of the restrictions imposed last October is not yet apparent. I would not think it right to try to stop the Australians from taking the steps they consider necessary to protect their overseas reserves, but I am glad to note that the economic measures which the Australian Prime Minister announced last week do not include further import restrictions.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in the Kidderminster area one carpet worker in five is now on short time, partly due to pre-Budget anticipation regarding Purchase Tax, partly due to the credit squeeze and very largely due to these import restrictions? Will he, therefore, have special regard to the prospect of discussing this matter further with the Australian Government, both in respect of motor cars and carpets?

I will certainly bear my hon. Friend's remarks in mind, and I am glad to note that in their recent announcements the Australian Government went away from import restrictions and relied upon other methods of import control.

Has the President of the Board of Trade really studied this matter? If he examines it, will he not find that the ridiculous position into which we have got the Australians arises entirely from the idiotic idea that a developing country can have a favourable balance of trade? So long as we go on with this ridiculous antediluvian idea which the Treasury has got sunk in its guts somewhere, we shall never get Australia developing to the extent that we require. Will the right hon. Gentleman look into that?

While I appreciate the vigour with which the right hon. Gentleman expresses his views, it is still necessary for the Australian Government, like other Governments, to live within their income.

Has the right hon. Gentleman observed that only a few minutes ago the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) told the House, in relation to short time and unemployment in the motor car industry in the Midlands, that there are 45,000 vacancies? Will the Minister take note of those vacancies when the hon. Member raises questions about short time in Kidderminster?

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the import restrictions imposed by the Australian Government are due entirely to the trade gap? Does he not think that the way to encourage Australia is to buy more of our fruit there and less in the Argentine?

Australia is a very great market for British manufacturers, and continues to be so. I do not think we should start to develop some entirely new form of barter deal between this country and the Commonwealth.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by how much consumers' expenditure on food has increased in 1955 over 1951; how much is represented by an increase in the volume of consumption; how much is due to the increase in prices; and the prospects for 1956.

My right hon. Friend has as yet nothing to add to the reply he gave to the hon. Member on 30th January, when figures were given for the first nine months of 1955. Estimates of food expenditure in 1955, both in actual value and in volume, will be given in the Economic Survey to be published at the end of this month. It is not possible to express in any precise terms the prospects for 1956 since so much depends not only on imports of food but on the crops and harvests of home agriculture this year.

As I can appreciate the deep humiliation of the Government in regard to their failure in this respect, I have not the heart to ask the right hon. Gentleman an unkind supplementary question.

There is no humiliation on my part. The Answer to the hon. Member's previous question showed that consumption of food had risen by 7 per cent. in 1955.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the agricultural workers who produce this food are entitled to a decent wage, and that the only way they can be paid a decent wage is for a proper price to be paid for the food which they produce?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what conditions are attached by the Treasury to its gifts of land to the National Trust in areas of outstanding scenic beauty to preserve their amenities.

The only condition attached to such transfers is that the National Trust should not alienate any of the land without the prior consent of the Treasury.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that properties worth £380,000 have been transferred to the National Trust in the last six years and that the Trust has failed lamentably to maintain the amenities of some of these cliff lands in Cornwall? Will he look at the matter again to ensure that the Trust really matches up to its responsibilities?

I could not accept allegations of that kind about the Trust across the Floor of the House.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by how much the purchasing value of the £ sterling has fallen since October, 1951; and why.

The purchasing power of the £, taken as 20s. in October, 1951, is estimated to have been 2s. 5d. less in January, 1956. The calculation is based on the Consumer Price Index between 1951 and 1954 and the Interim Index of Retail Prices since then. In reply to the second part of the Question, I would ask the hon. Member to read the White Paper on "The Economic Implications of Full Employment" which is being published today.

Seeing that the Government's policy to mend the hole in the purse has evidently failed, and indeed the hole is getting bigger, do the Government now propose to change their policy?

I would advise the hon. Member to read this very interesting and important White Paper which is being published and then consider whether he wishes to ask further questions.

Has my right hon. Friend comparable figures showing the fall in the value of the £ sterling between 1945 and 1951?

Yes, Sir, I have. They have been given frequently before in the House, and they will be given again if asked for.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what new thoughts have suddenly struck the Government about this matter since the last Election in view of the fact that they are now producing a new White Paper? Will he say by how much the purchasing value of the £ sterling would have risen since October, 1951, if internal prices had followed the trend of world prices?

The second part of the question would involve a calculation which I could not do in my head. May I say very seriously that I hope hon. and right hon. Members on both sides of the House will read the White Paper carefully. It is not a party document. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] It contains a great deal of information which will be of general non-party interest.

As I am sure that the Financial Secretary has read this important White Paper already, can he tell us whether this fall in the value of the £ will cease from now on?

I hope that we shall have—

Order. I do not think that arises.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will exempt all British manufactured pottery seconds sold in the home market from Purchase Tax.

No, Sir. Any scheme of that kind would break down.

Does the Financial Secretary not agree that it is the policy of the industry to maintain the high quality of its products so as to retain its enormous export trade? If the right hon. Gentleman is not prepared to do something on these lines, what will be the position of the industry? How is it to dispose of pottery seconds of high quality.

I appreciate the thoughts underlying the hon. Member's Question, but if he will look into the practical implications he will see that it would be quite impossible to define seconds in such a way as to make sure that there was no unfair discrimination against goods which were not seconds but were produced to not quite so high a standard of quality.

In view of the fact that this is a special technical problem, is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to receive a representative delegation and, if so, receive it sympathetically?

I will willingly have a talk with the hon. Member about the matter in the first instance.

Will my right hon. Friend take no such action while British people are prepared to accept second-best?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much revenue he estimates would be lost to the Treasury if the hotels and restaurant industries were relieved of Purchase Tax on all the essential implements of their trade, such as carpets, curtains, linen, cutlery and kitchen equipment; and, in so far as this information is not readily available, if he will institute an inquiry.

The information for which my hon. and learned Friend asks is not available and could only be obtained, if at all, by means of extensive special inquiries. I see no prospect that it would be possible to relieve particular users, such as hotels, of Purchase Tax on the goods they buy, and consequently I do not think that the cost of making such inquiries would be justified.

If my right hon. Friend does not know how much it will cost, how can he know whether we can afford it or not? Is he aware that the tourist trade is such an important dollar earner, that Purchase Tax forces up hotel prices and thereby keeps trade away, and that these are essential implements in the hotel trade? Will he do something about it?

This is not a question of the Chancellor of the Exchequer affording it or otherwise, but of the principles of the Purchase Tax—and the Purchase Tax is based on charging tax irrespective of the particular buyer.

While we all recognise the right hon. Gentleman's rather predatory ideas about Purchase Tax revenue, does he not recall that during the Chancellorship of Sir Stafford Cripps there was very special discrimination in favour of those hotels which had dollar visitors? Since it was done for them, and they are a special group, why does the right hon. Gentleman now say that it is not practicable or desirable?

A scheme was operated for one year, 1950–51, and it was decided not to carry it on beyond that period.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will take action to enable foreign purchasers of British goods to obtain export credit facilities in the United Kingdom at special rates.

No, Sir. Credits for the purchase of British goods can only be made available at commercial rates of interest.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as a result of his Department's policy of high interest rates, credit facilities are much cheaper in the financial institutions of our competitors and there is danger of our losing not only the export credit business but also the export trade which depends on that credit?

British exporters can give foreign buyers on their own account what credit they think necessary. The hon. Member's suggestion is much more far-reaching, and I must inform him that it would not be possible.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will sympathetically consider relaxing the Income Tax regulations, so as to reduce the financial burden falling upon widowers having the responsibility of children.

I have noted the hon. Member's suggestion.

Will the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the regulations should ensure adequate provision and that motherless children are adequately looked after?

As I had to say in answer to a Question on Tuesday, what ever views I have on a matter like this, I ought not to express them when we are so near to Budget day.

The old story.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the additional cost to the Exchequer which would be incurred by granting housekeeper's allowance to widowers, if the requirement of residing on the premises were abandoned.

I regret that the information on which to base such an estimate is not available.

Will the Minister realise that it is not always possible for the housekeeper to live in the same house and that, apart from that, it is not always morally right either? This is a serious matter, to which I hope the Minister will give serious attention.

One aspect of the matter was touched upon in the Report of the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income, and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer has already pledged himself to examine the whole of the recommendations of that body.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that spinsters are involved in this matter as well, and that we do not want consideration of housekeepers confined only to widowers? This is a very old question and a very old grievance—Income Tax relief in respect of housekeepers only for widows and widowers.

I had noticed that the Question referred only to widowers, and I was not quite certain why widows were excluded.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will increase the Income Tax child allowance in accordance with the second Report of the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income.

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

Is not the Chancellor at least giving some thoughts to these matters? Will he please take note that this should have a very high priority in any tax reliefs which are possible?

It will be within the recollection of the House that only about five minutes ago I said that my right hon. Friend was considering the whole of the recommendations of the Royal Commission.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what rate of interest is to be charged by the Public Works Loan Board on future housing loans.

There is no separate rate for housing loans: the lending rates of the Board apply without distinction to all purposes for which local authorities are authorised to borrow. The terms of future loans will depend on the course of interest rates.

But will the Minister advise the Board that the recent rise in the Bank Rate will not mean a further increase in the already excessive interest charges on housing loans? Will he drop the new procedure of forcing local authorities to attempt to borrow elsewhere at even higher rates?

There is no distinction here between housing loans and other loans, but unquestionably the policy that was announced by my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal, when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer, in October of last year must stay.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what instructions have been issued to the various Government Departments to give effect to the policy of Her Majesty's Government that the number of civil servants would be reduced by 10,000 to 15,000.

Proposals to achieve this reduction are now being discussed with Departments.

Could I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether any date has been fixed for this reduction or whether it is still in the melting pot?

There is no firm final date. We are pressing on rapidly.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will take steps to organise a national lottery.

No, Sir.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is aware that the marked change in public opinion during the last few years has led to a widespread demand for a scheme of this kind? Would not such a scheme divert a great deal of money into places where it could be used in the best interests of the nation?

It is my duty to pay particular regard to the opinion of this House. Only two or three weeks ago the House endorsed, in general, the Report of the Royal Commission on Betting, Lotteries and Gaming, which stated that it was undesirable for the State to make itself responsible for the provision of gambling facilities.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why we should be so unctuous and righteous about this when we condone what is, in effect, a national lottery through the pools?

I was not being unctuous, and certainly I was not charging the House with being unctuous. All I was saying was that a representative Royal Commission, which impressed the House by its recommendations, advised that this would be a mistake.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that five years have passed since the Royal Commission issued its Report?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that cases frequently occur of both shops and the British Transport Commission refusing to accept farthings in payment; and if he will therefore arrange for the withdrawal of these coins from circulation.

Farthings are legal tender up to 1s. 0d. They are still required for certain transactions, and it would not be justifiable to withdraw them from circulation.

May I ask my right hon. Friend if he would make it clear that these coins have to be accepted if they are offered in payment; and what advice could he give to those who offer and have them refused?

Those who offer them certainly have the law on their side. I do not know how much further I can carry the matter.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the value and earnings of British films exported to, and the cost of films imported from, the United States and Europe, respectively, during 1955.

I regret that no figures are available for the earnings of British films. Precise figures of remittances for films in 1955 are not yet available, but they are unlikely to be very different from the 1954 figures of £9 million to the United States—excluding profits and payments which cannot be remitted under the Anglo-American Film greement—and about £½ million to Europe.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the agreement is working well? Is there nothing he can do to assist the film industry so that more British films are used both at home and abroad, thereby improving the position of our balance of payments?

Perhaps my hon. Friend would be good enough to put both those questions to the President of the Board of Trade.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make arrangements for the British Museum Reading Room to remain open each weekday until 10 p.m.; and what additional cost would be involved.

The Trustees of the British Museum recognise that there is a demand for later opening of the Reading Room. But, having regard to available resources, they do not feel able to make this extension of their services to the public at the present time. It would cost an additional £35,000 a year and would require sixty-eight additional staff.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the present closing hour of 5 p.m. makes it impossible for people in normal full-time employment to use the services of the British Museum Reading Room, and in view of the fact that the cost would be only £35,000, would he not use his influence to bring about this desirable change?

I cannot accept phrases like "only £35,000" or "only sixty-eight additional staff." The hours of opening were extended until 7 p.m. as an experiment shortly before the last war. That was not a great success. To extend them to 10 p.m. would require this considerable number of extra people.