asked the Minister of Labour how many carpet trade workers were unemployed and how many were working short time in Midlothian and in Scotland, respectively, as at 16th April, 1956.

On 16th April the number of carpet trade workers wholly unemployed was 259 in Scotland and 51 in Midlothian. The number on short time in the week beginning 16th April was about 3,000 in Scotland and 60 in Midlothian.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the situation has been accentuated since that time? Is he aware that the cheapest form of carpet in Britain is produced in this area and that it is the only place where tapestry is made? Is he further aware that our foreign markets have been closed and home markets are being filled by the importation of Belgian cotton carpets, which are sold at prices against which our workers cannot compete?

I think that recently there has been a slight, although very slight, improvement in the numbers of those on short time. The second and major part of the hon. Member's supplementary question is a matter for my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, to whom the hon. Member already has a Question on the Order Paper.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen a report that a certain Scottish firm is opening a factory south of the Border? Does he take any steps to guide firms to places where there are unemployed, rather than to establish factories in places where there is already plenty of employment for the people who reside there?

In conjunction with my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade, I always try to draw the attention of industrialists to places where there is a pool of labour. I have not seen the particular reference to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred. Perhaps he will draw my attention to it.

asked the Minister of Labour how many persons engaged in the furniture trade and resident within the Chigwell urban district of Essex have been discharged from employment, or placed on short time, during the present year; how many have since been reemployed in the furniture trade; and how many are unemployed at the latest date for which figures are available.

It is not possible to state how many of the workers employed in the furniture industry in adjacent areas who have been discharged or placed on short time since the beginning of the year are resident within the Chigwell urban district. On 16th April, 39 were registered as unemployed at the Chigwell Employment Exchange, of whom 30 were temporarily stopped.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that the introduction of automation in industry is giving rise to serious misgiving among the organised workers; and whether he is now in a position to make a statement.

asked the Minister of Labour what action his Department is taking to consider the consequences of automation in the employment field.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is now able to state when the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research Report on the Effects of Automation will be ready; and whether in view of the industrial unrest now arising, he will now indicate the policy of Her Majesty's Government on the matter.

Technological development has been for many years a feature of our economic life, and automation is its latest and most novel form. It is welcomed by the Government and responsible opinion on both sides of industry as essential to our future efficiency and, therefore, to the continuance of full employment. We should also recognise the very natural anxiety that its introduction may cause. There are bound to be employment problems involving the redeployment of labour. New skills will certainly be required.

These problems can be satisfactorily resolved if the Government and both sides of industry work in close co-operation with each other. It is essential that firms which are contemplating the introduction of automation should in their planning consider from the beginning how it will affect their workers and bring them into early discussion. On their side the Government accept a continuing responsibility for maintaining the general level of demand. They will also help to meet the special effects in the employment field of technological changes by making provision, as they have already announced, for a wide extension of technical education; by encouraging opportunities for training and by assisting, through their employment services, workers who have to change their employment. These problems are being studied by universities and other bodies and by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

The Report by the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research is completed and will be issued this month. In the light of that Report I intend to discuss the whole question with representatives of the employers, trade unions and nationalised industries on the national joint advisory councils and, as appropriate, my colleagues will have similar discussions with other advisory bodies.

The Government believe that if all those concerned play their part in this way these new changes, with their unlimited possibilities for the future, will prove of immeasurable benefit to the prosperity and happiness of the nation.

I am sure the House welcomes those observations on this important matter. Is the Minister aware that organised workers are by no means limited to the philosophy of the Luddite movement these days but welcome the development of a new technique in modern industry? However, they are seriously concerned with the probable economic and social effect of the new machines unless there is—as the Minister has indicated—a real possibility of early consultation between both sides of industry, with Government co-operation. Is he not aware that that may ensure the limitation of the effects of automation on the people concerned?

I recognise what the hon. Member has said. These consultations from the very beginning are of the first importance. Of course, there are anxieties, most natural anxieties, in this field, and we and, I am sure, the representatives of the employers and the trade unions want to do everything we can to meet them.

Has my right hon. Friend seen an article in today's Daily Mail which gives more information about what has happened with automation in the United States? Does he not agree that there is a great deal to be learned from that country about the effects of automation?

We have, of course, especially in my Ministry, studied the experience and the conclusions of other countries, but they are not exactly applicable, and we must work out our own solutions in the light of the special problems we have in these islands.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the statement he has made is encouraging but that it is pretty useless in the short term to expect employers and workers in any one factory to find a solution to the problem? Indeed, it is quite impossible at national level for trade unions and employers to do it. We welcome his statement of Government interest, but will he try to give us a considered policy statement on behalf of the Government as soon as he can, because it is quite wrong to believe that a sort of Pontius Pilate attitude of washing one's hands of the matter is possible in these circumstances?

I have never said or thought that the Government have no responsibility in this matter. Of course we have, and I gladly recognise that. It is fair to say that this is a matter which, although it has come into prominence in the last few days, is not one of which Government agencies and Ministries have thought only in the last few days. The Report from the D.S.I.R., which is of the first importance—and an admirable Report it is—has been in preparation for about two to two and a half years. I am certain that when we have it—and that will be in a matter of only two or three weeks—we shall be able, in the light of that Report and with all the advisory bodies playing their full part, to feel our way towards a solution.

Does not the Minister remember that in the debate we had recently on the employment situation he did wash his hands of this, saying it was a matter for industry and that the level of unemployment and short-time working were matters for the employers after talks with the workers? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we require something more than a statement that the Government are interested? We need some indication that the Government are planning to have the jobs available for the men who may be affected by automation. We need some indication that the Government are planning to arrange for the workers' transfer and for their travelling and for their new houses if they have to move from their present homes? Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us when he can say anything further about these practical matters?

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman does not wish to misrepresent what I said in the debate on the employment situation. We were dealing with the level of manpower in a particular industry, and I said that it could not be laid down by the Government unless there were direction of labour, which it was impossible to have. I have acknowledged over and over again in statements and in reply to Questions that the Government have a responsibility, and a continuing responsibility. So far as the rest of the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is concerned, it is precisely this problem that we are studying and have been studying for some time, and particularly now in the light of the very informative reports, including the recent one from the D.S.I.R.

asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware of the strike of workers at Standard Motors in Coventry owing to a dispute caused by the introduction of automatic processes; and, in view of the concern of the workers about the impact of automation upon their future livelihood, if he will make a statement.

I am aware of the strike at the Standard Motor Company, Coventry, in support of a demand that instead of men being laid off short time should be introduced whilst one of the firm's factories is being retooled for the production of a new tractor. I understand that whilst a certain number of additional automatic processes will be installed this is only a part of the re-equipment of the factory and the installation of these particular machines is not the cause of the dispute.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at two mass meetings only two persons voted against the continuance of the strike, even though it is based upon short-time working instead of redundancy. which would mean a reduction in living standards all round? Is he further aware that the issue immediately at stake is what shall happen over the installation of new plant over a period of about eight weeks, and that the introduction of automatic processes will rouse industrial unrest again unless principles can be applied which are agreed upon in advance and honoured by both parties?

I do not want to comment on the status of the strike. It is at the moment, of course, unofficial. I understand that ten unions are meeting at York tomorrow to discuss their attitude towards it. In spite of that, conciliation officers of my Department have been in touch with the management and the unions. We shall continue to do what we can. This relates to what I said in my main reply to the last Question. if any changes, whether they be by way of automation or not, are to be introduced, it is absolutely essential that from the beginning the unions should be brought into the very closest consultation.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he will reconsider his decision not to hold an inquiry into the rates of pay of women employed in the engineering industry.

asked the Minister of Labour what progress has been made in meeting the trade union request for a court of inquiry regarding equal pay for women; and what steps he has taken to expedite this.

I informed the trade unions concerned on 26th April that I was unable to accede to their request for an independent inquiry into women's work in engineering. I can see no grounds for reconsidering this decision.

Is it not the fact that the Ministry of Labour is now looked upon by both sides of industry as a sort of neutral court to which both can go when they are in great difficulty? May not the result of this refusal of the Minister be that, when issues of very great importance arise and he wishes to set up a court of inquiry, the trade union may refuse to co-operate in consequence of his action now? Will he again consider this matter? This is indeed a very great national issue. The Government themselves have accepted the basis of equal pay. Does it not appear that they are now backing out when the union asks for the implementation in private industry of what the Government have done in the Civil Service?

I shall be happy to accept that description which the hon. Gentleman has given of my Department. This, however, is a purely practical question, whether a court of inquiry set up by the Minister of Labour is the most appropriate body for what is, I recognise, an important and serious national issue. My answer to that would be that a court of inquiry is the last resort in the hands of the Minister of Labour, a resort which he uses extremely rarely, and it would seem to me, as I said in my letter to which I have referred, and which I am quite ready to make public, wholly inappropriate for the sort of detailed inquiry that this would have to be.

Would the right hon. Gentleman prefer to have a strike in these industries if there is not equal pay? Is he aware that there is complete agreement between the men and women in industry on this point, and that there is a majority of Members of this House who support equal pay? Will he tell me what women can now do, and what others inside and outside the House can now do, who believe that this principle should be universally applied?

Naturally I should deem it a disastrous thing if there were a major strike in the engineering industry of this country. That, of course, is common ground. As I said, this is purely a practical issue about what the best way of resolving this may be. I cannot see that a court of inquiry set up by the Minister is the appropriate body. Indeed, in response to that letter the union is now asking the Federation whether it will meet to discuss the possibility of setting up such an inquiry within the industry itself, which is what I suggested.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that equal pay is regarded by professional women not as the end but as the beginning? Will he therefore use his influence and do evertyhing he can to see that the example of the Government and of the local authorities is followed in industry?

That is a very important question, but undoubtedly it goes wider than this Question.

asked the Minister of Labour the number of disabled persons employed at Remploy factories on 1st January, 1956, and on the latest available date.

The number of severely disabled persons employed by Remploy factories was 6,006 on 3rd January, 1956, and 6,022 on 27th March, 1956.

Whilst welcoming this slight increase, may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman will assure the House that Remploy will not suffer from Government economies and that efforts will be made to increase still further the numbers employed in these factories?

I think I can say that the pledge of a minimum of 6,000 still remains. Subject to its trading position, Remploy hopes to increase the number of severely disabled employees further during the course of the financial year.

What does "subject to its trading position" mean? Is not this the frightening thing—that so often pledges about Remploy are hedged round with references to its trading position, which of course would justify almost anything? What does the hon. Gentleman mean by that remark?

I have, in the course of an earlier debate, outlined all this in more detail. There is an agreement under which Remploy is certain of minimum guarantees for a five-year period. Coupled with that, there is the pledge of 6,000, which still stands. If the trading position allows Remploy to expand beyond 6,000 and yet keep within its five-year terms of reference from the financial point of view, the numbers can he increased.

asked the Minister of Labour how many workers of all grades are employed by Remploy at the latest convenient date compared with last year.

The number of workers of all grades, both disabled and others, employed by Remploy at 27th March, 1956, was 7,971 compared with 8,357 at 29th March, 1955.

I hope the Minister appreciates that this is disturbing news. However, may I ask whether the Government continue to regard Remploy as a social service and not only as a trading undertaking? Will the hon. Gentleman say how this level of employment will be affected by the Chancellor's proposed cuts?

I have made a fairly categorical statement about the last part of the hon. Member's supplementary question in the course of my reply to the last Question. As to the earlier part, it is well known, and has been debated in the House, that there was a run-down in Remploy during the last year, for reasons which were explained. That run-down was to a firm minimum, and we have not gone below that minimum. We are, in fact, now climbing slightly above it, as my earlier Answer showed.

asked the Minister of Labour whether he is aware of the recent medical and technological research into the question of byssinosis, particularly the dust extraction appliance devised by the Shirley Research Institute now on test at the Monarch Mill, Oldham; and what action he is proposing to take.

Yes, Sir. My Department has been in the closest touch with these developments since their inception. Neither the medical nor the technological research is completed. As regards the former, work is proceeding on lines which were noted at the meeting of the Industrial Health Advisory Committee last month. As regards the latter, latest reports show that the dust extraction appliance to which my hon. Friend refers represents a great advance in this field and my Department is associating itself with this work by making further detailed dust estimations. The Joint Advisory Committee set up by the Chief Inspector of Factories on the conditions of work in the cotton trade is following the subject closely.

While thanking my hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he does not agree that there is already no serious doubt that this device is a great advance on anything that we have had before in preventing this distressing industrial disease? In view of that, can my hon. Friend assure the House that no time will be lost in taking the necessary steps to ensure that its use is as widely spread as possible in industry at the earliest possible date?

We certainly agree that the tests appeared to show that this new apparatus is giving extremely good results. There are, however, two other appliances, based on different principles, which have recently been devised. The value of these has still to be determined. The Government are arranging to conduct detailed tests in order to compile records to compare the three methods, but I can assure my hon. Friend that we are aware of the seriousness of the problem and that no time will be lost in making progress.

Will the hon. Gentleman call the attention of managements and inspectors of factories to these appliances and recommend that wherever there is excessive dust they should be installed?

I will certainly see that they know of it, though I am sure that they do so already, because it is the Factory Department of my Ministry that is particularly looking after and examining these latest developments.

asked the Minister of Labour if his attention has been drawn to the serious situation at present confronting the workers in the shale-oil industry of Mid and West Lothian; and what steps he is taking to secure alternative employment for these workers.

I understand that about 500 workers in the shale-oil industry will become redundant within the next three months. As opportunities for alternative work in the area are limited, workers in their own interests would be well advised to register with the local employment exchanges before their present employment is terminated.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that answer does not give a full picture? In view of the urgency and magnitude of the problem in this home of the oil industry in the old world, will not the right hon. Gentleman consider urging upon the Government the setting up of a committee with powers to deal with this scheduled area which has had nothing done for it and where our oil industry has been drowned in a deluge of imported foreign oil?

I know a little about the problems of the shale-oil industry, and I have read carefully the interesting Adjournment debate which was initiated by the hon. Member for West Lothian (Mr. J. Taylor), a short time ago. I should like to study the hon. Member's suggestion about a committee of investigation into the industry, though I find it hard to think that such a committee would get over the difficulties which we all recognise the industry is facing.

Now that the Notification of Vacancies Order is no longer applicable, would the right hon. Gentleman do what he can to give special notice to these people that they should go to the employment exchange in order to ensure that their lack of employment is known? Is it possible, within the Distribution of Industry Acts, to get Government factories erected in these areas so that industry may provide alternative employment?

We are doing what we can to encourage people to register early, and also to provide within the area alternative work for them, but I am bound to say that is a rather difficult problem. As for the second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, I believe that point was raised in the Adjournment debate to which I have referred and was answered by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will now make a statement with regard to the discussions which have been taking place on the subject of fishing with otter boards for Dublin Bay prawns in the Firth of Forth.

The request of the Firth of Forth Fishermen's Association for a modification of the law about the use of otter boards with seine nets for prawn fishing has been discussed with its representatives. The Association has agreed to co-operate in experiments designed to test this and other methods of catching and their effect on the stocks of white fish.

Are we to understand from that reply that we are well on the way now to a solution of that problem?

I think that that is a proper deduction. The fishermen are co-operating very readily with us.

Has the hon. Gentleman consulted the Foreign Office about this important international problem?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement on the work of the fisheries research vessel "Explorer" since her launching, indicating the results of her researches and the nature and extent of her contributions to our knowledge in the spheres of her research.

"Explorer" was taken over from the builders on 30th March and began research work at the beginning of May. She will be used mainly to collect information about the stocks of fish, their movement and surroundings, required for the study of conservation and other problems. The collection of information of this kind does not often yield quick results.

Having regard to the large capital sum spent on this establishment, does the hon. Gentleman realise that it is desirable to make frequent and regular reports on its work to the House? Will he arrange that that should be done?

As far as it is practicable, but this is necessarily a long-term process and I do not think that the House would be interested in too frequent reports.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received respecting the inadequacy of school accommodation at Faifley, Clydebank.

None, Sir.

Would the hon. Gentleman go into this matter? Is he aware that this is a new housing estate some way out of the burgh and many children have to be transported from the area to the main part of the town? This causes a great deal of difficulty in the area. The school is also at present overcrowded, and the overcrowding is increasing every term. Will the hon. Gentleman therefore inquire into this to see whether a temporary building can be provided and a start made on another school as soon as possible?

Yes, Sir. The hon. Member will know that approval was given in April this year to the building of temporary huts at the school to provide 360 extra places. The authority has this in hand, and I shall be very glad to give the hon. Member the details.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the ratio of staff per 100 in-patients at the Northern Hospital, Dunfermline; and the national average per 100 in-patients in Scotland as a whole for general hospitals having 50–300 beds.

The ratio for this hospital in March, 1956, was 100 total staff per 100 average patients, as against 93 per 100 in March, 1955. Figures for the whole of Scotland in March, 1956, are not yet available: in March, 1955, the ratio for general hospitals with 51–300 beds was 132 per 100 and for chronic sick hospitals was 75 per 100. Some of the work carried on in this particular hospital is appropriate to the latter, i.e. to the chronic sick, rather than to the former category.

That was more or less the answer I received last week, but is the Minister aware that the Group Medical Superintendent, who is an authority on this question, has expressed alarm at the inadequacy of the staff in this hospital and in the West Fife hospital, and will he look into the matter to see whether something cannot be done to remedy the position?

Yes, Sir, we will look again at the matter, but as far as we can see, the staffing seems to be about right.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has now decided to accept the conclusion of the Committee on the Employment of Children in the potato harvest, that it is still necessary to exempt children from attendance at school to assist in lifting the potato crop.

On 22nd March a circular was sent to education authorities informing them that my right hon. Friend accepted the Committee's conclusion.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that most people regard the decision of the Secretary of State on this matter as being very sensible in the circumstances?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are still many people who do not regard the attitude of the Secretary of State as a correct one, and is he further aware that the solution of this problem depends upon the invention of a machine which can deal properly with the harvesting of potatoes? Is the Minister prepared to ask his Department to step aside from pushing on automation with such speed in order to find out whether the scientists cannot discover a machine which will relieve children for their proper job, which is to be educated for the purposes for which the schools stand?

Yes, Sir. We recognise that the proper solution here is the provision of a suitable all-purpose machine, which my hon. Friend the Joint Under-Secretary will be dealing with on a subsequent Question. As to whether the decision of my right hon. Friend was right, there can be no question of that. If the right hon. Gentleman would agree to look at paragraph 33 of the Report of the Committee, he will find that it made a clear recommendation and conclusion, which we have accepted.

The point is whether the Question and Answer do not show a certain amount of complacency in assuming that this matter can lie dormant.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what steps he is taking to promote research for the production of an efficient potato harvester.

Research and development work is being actively conducted by the National Institute of Agricultural Engineering and its sub-station in Scotland at Howden. As the rose Committee said in its Report, "much time, thought, and money are being devoted by individuals, firms and Government agencies to the production of" such a machine. Every encouragement has been given by my right hon. Friend and he is keeping the problem under continuous review.

In view of the competition for these children's services both in education and in agriculture, does my hon. Friend recognise the urgency of the question? Has he considered co-operating in research with his English counterparts? Has he drawn in, for example, the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research or the Agricultural Research Council? Every avenue to discover a suitable machine should be explored.

I think that the answer to all my hon. Friend's questions is, "Yes, Sir."

In appreciating the urgency of getting a really successful all-purpose potato harvester, does the hon. Gentleman not realise that the more progressive and forward-thinking farmers have for a good many years been using the elevator type of harvester, lifting two or three drills at a time, thus to a great extent saving the employment of children? Will he do his utmost to ensure that this improved type of harvester is used until such time as we can (let the all-purpose potato harvester to which his hon. Friend has referred?

We shall be very glad to do what we can to ensure its use in appropriate circumstances, hut, as the hon. Member knows, it is not appropriate in all circumstances.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will name the body responsible for maintaining the ancient right-of-way between Rosslyn Castle and Polton in Midlothian, and if he will insist on its being satisfactorily maintained for public use.

I understand that Penicuik District Council, which has power to repair and maintain public ways under Section 29 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act, 1894, is having this path surveyed.

Is the Minister aware that this is one of the most beautiful spots in southern Scotland, which could be improved a thousand per cent, if the Rivers Pollution (Scotland) Act were being operated as it should be? Is he also aware that Rosslyn Glen is of inestimable value for geological research but is a danger to public use if it is not completely maintained, because tourist traffic from all over the world appreciates its beauties?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that this matter is being most carefully looked at. In fact, the Penicuik District Council received a complaint from the Scottish Right-of-Way Society about this path six months ago, and remitted the matter to two members of the council to make a survey. The members have not yet found it possible to report back to the district council, which, however, has reported that two public-spirited persons have taken hand saws and have removed the trunks of trees which were blocking the path.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what investigations he made into the additional costs of milk production in Scotland since 1953 before fixing the recent Price Review.

The information on costs of milk production considered at the recent Price Review related to changes in costs in the United Kingdom as a whole during the preceding year up to January, 1956. The figures are based on information obtained from independent agricultural economists at the universities and agricultural colleges and were agreed between the Government and the National Farmers' Unions.

Is the Minister aware that these researches are not at all approved of by the small farmer and that they continue to look into this matter more in anger than in sorrow? Does the hon. Gentleman not think that it is time he carried out a special investigation into the plight of the small farmers in this matter?

The costs of production of milk by small farmers vary by as much as 100 per cent., some being twice as much as others, and it would be difficult to take all cases of this nature into consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many requests to borrow he has received from local authorities during the last three months; and how many of these he has refused.

My right hon. Friend's Department has dealt with 756 applications for borrowing consent received from local authorities during the three months ended on 30th April last: 79 of the 756 applications have been refused.

Is the Minister aware that in Ayrshire the Minister is refusing permission to local authorities to borrow for necessary alterations to the sanitary departments of their village halls, and does the hon. Gentleman not think that it is carrying this economy business rather far?

The refusal to grant approval for sanitary and water work has only been made in 35 out of 144 cases. If the hon. Gentleman will let me have particulars, I will look at the matter again.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many protests he has received from local authorities, following the issue of Circular 8802 by the Scottish Home Department.

Three, Sir.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think he has adequate powers to deal with local authority borrowing without continuing this penal rate of interest?

That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Has the Secretary of State recently been discussing it with Scottish local authorities? What have they to say about it?

All steps are being discussed with local authorities in Scotland.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will state separately the number of people killed and injured in each of the years 1953, 1954, and 1955, in incidents where a driver was drunk in charge or under the influence of alcohol.

The numbers of persons killed or injured in Scotland in accidents where a driver was subsequently convicted of being drunk in charge or under the influence of drink or a drug were as follows:—In 1953, eight persons killed and 87 injured; in 1954, four killed and 109 injured; in 1955, seven killed and 116 injured.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the growing concern amongst the public and police authorities in Scotland at the mounting number of innocent victims of this road carnage? Has his attention been drawn to the criticism of the inadequate and farcical penalties which are being imposed, and can he not do something about it?

Yes, Sir, we are indeed, and it is without any doubt a very distressing problem. We are considering what could be done.

May I ask the Minister, as a Sassenach, and regardless of whether this happens in Scotland or England, whether he does not consider that a man who is found drunk in charge of a car should have his licence taken away from him, if not for life, at least until he forswears the use of alcohol? What does the hon. Gentleman think would happen to an engine driver found drunk in charge of an engine?

I take careful note of the right hon. Gentleman's Sassenach intervention.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland when it is proposed to start work on the new hospital for Dundee.

I am afraid I cannot give a date for the start of building work on this very large project. An architect has, however, been appointed to enable a start to be made on the planning work, which will in itself take several years to complete.

Is the Minister aware that his reply is rather staggering? This important hospital has been in the blueprint stage for some years, and it is over twelve months since the Secretary of State announced that definite plans were being proceeded with? Could he not be more precise about when building is to start?

I appreciate that this is an important project and that it ought to be proceeded with at the earliest date, but having regard to all the circumstances, it is impossible to envisage a start before 1960 to 1961.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will make a statement of the Government's policy towards capital development in the Highlands in the light of the representations made to him by the Highland Advisory Panel.

While proposals for capital investment in the Highlands must be considered on their merits, my right hon. Friend will certainly bear the Panel's recommendation in mind.

Is the Minister aware of the very strong words used by the Chairman of the Highland Advisory Panel, Lord Cameron, about this matter? Is he aware that Lord Cameron said there was a strong case for exempting Highland development from the effects of the Government's credit squeeze? Is the hon. Gentleman further aware that both the Glasgow Herald and the Scotsman were extremely caustic about the policy of the Government in this respect?

Yes, Sir, one is aware of that, but I put this point to the hon. Gentleman, that whilst all schemes must be considered on their individual merits, their importance to highland development generally is one of the factors taken into account.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the Highlands are suffering from years of neglect, that the proposals put forward by the Highland Panel have been before Government Departments for many years, and that it is time that more drastic action was taken?

I think it would be truer to say that the Panel's recommendations have mostly been very promptly accepted by the Government and acted upon.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will introduce legislation to amend the licensing laws making it illegal for grocers, or any other person, to sell or deliver alcoholic liquor in bottles to young persons under the age of 18.

My right hon. Friend has no evidence at present of any general need for such legislation.

Will the hon. Gentleman convey to his right hon. Friend the information that there is great suspicion in Scotland that children under the age of 14 can be supplied with alcohol in sealed bottles by licensed grocers, and that such alcohol is used by teen-agers and this creates an abuse of the licensing laws? Is he aware that the number of teen-agers arrested for being drunk and incapable increased during 1950, 1951 and 1952, and that it was only as a result of an appeal to the trade by the police authorities in Glasgow that some action was taken by showing notices?

Yes, we know about the facts. Action is taken where it can be. However, we have no evidence—that is the point—of the need for a change of this nature.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether, in view of the Government's economy programme, any changes are proposed in either the extent or timing of the expansion of Scottish technical education announced in Command Paper No. 9703.

In view of the urgency and importance of extending technical education, the review of expenditure for 1956–57 proposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the Budget debate will not apply to the Government's plans recently announced in the White Paper.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there will be general agreement with the Secretary of State's decision, and that it will be generally hoped that local authorities will give the Secretary of State every possible cooperation?

The local authorities know that, and have known it for a very long time.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many drunk-in-charge cases were reported to the police in 1955.

The number of cases of driving, attempting to drive, or being in charge of a motor vehicle while under the influence of drink or drugs, which were reported, to the police in Scotland in 1955 was 1,747.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the figure given last year was 1,494, which was then the highest on record and was about 70 per cent. above the 1938 figure? Yet here we have an increase of 200 upon the previous highest figure. Is it not further evidence that action is urgently required to deal with this type of case in order to protect sober motorists as well as pedestrians?

Does not my hon. Friend agree that this proves how sensible and efficacious has been the action of the Sheriff Substitute of Perth in imposing sentences of imprisonment in similar cases?

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, besides the 1,700 persons who have been detected as being drunk, there are many others who behave as if they are drunk as a result of driving for far longer hours than the law permits? Is he doing anything to curtail long driving hours?

If the right hon. Gentleman has evidence of that, I should be glad to have it. At the moment, I have no such evidence.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the terms of the replies made by the Educational Institute of Scotland and the local education authorities to his recent request for their views on the structure and functioning of the National Joint Council.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what conclusions he has reached as the result of his consideration of possible changes in the machinery for negotiating teachers' salaries in Scotland.

My right hon. Friend has carefully considered the suggestion made by the hon. Lady the Member for North Lanarkshire on 2nd December that, in effect, the Secretary of State's power to modify or reject recommendations of the National Joint Council should be abolished; he has also examined certain other proposals, involving changes in the composition of the Council and in procedure, some of which were made by the hon. Lady and some in another place on 8th December. My right hon. Friend obtained from the Association of County Councils, the Counties of Cities Association and the Educational Institute of Scotland their views on the issues raised, and he is in agreement with these bodies that the power of the Secretary of State and the composition of the National Joint Council should remain as at present and that no major changes in procedure are called for.

Will the hon. Gentleman say how far his negotiations with the National Joint Council are preconditioned by salary awards in England?

The negotiations take place in a very open frank manner. There is, of course, the link between what is spent on education in Scotland and what is spent in England, but, in fact, in Scotland we spend a good deal more on teachers' salaries in proportion to our grant than is spent in England.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Minister did not address his mind to my supplementary question, and apparently he did not understand it. May I repeat it?

I think the hon. and learned Member had better put another Question on the Order Paper.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he has now considered the report of the panel of experts examining the Forth tube crossing; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot yet add to the reply which my right hon. Friend gave to my hon. and gallant Friend on 1st May.

I appreciate my hon. Friend's position, but will he do his best to cut out delay?

Yes, Sir, there will be no delay, but at the moment we cannot move until we have had replies from the local authorities.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will consider amending the regulations implementing the Annual Price Review so as to change from 1st April to 1st January the date after which a calf has to be born to qualify for the increased rate of the calf subsidy.

No, Sir. The increase in the calf subsidy forms part of the Price Review determinations for livestock products, and for Price Review purposes the livestock year commences on 1st April. It would not, therefore, be either desirable or practicable to make changes retrospectively.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, although 1st April may be all right from the administrative and bookkeeping point of view, it is not all right from the farming point of view because it encourages late calving and will he therefore reconsider the matter?

We recognise that 1st April comes in the middle of the calving season, and it would perhaps have been a little more logical to start later, but we wanted to begin as early as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many primary and secondary schools were under construction at the latest date for which figures are available; and how the total figures compare with those of the same date in 1955.

On 31st March, 1956, there were 138 new schools under construction of which 106 were primary and 32 secondary, compared with 111 a year previously of which 88 were primary and 23 secondary.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) what requirements, under town and country planning law, he has imposed to protect the beauties of Clackmannanshire from spoliation by the growth of pit bings;

(2) whether he is aware that the scenery in Clackmannanshire will be spoilt by unsightly bings of refuse which may result from the proposed large coal development; and whether he will ensure that suitable trees are planted to grow with the bings and preserve the amenities.

The deposit of refuse resulting from proposed coal development on a site not already used for the purpose on 1st July, 1948, requires the permission of the local planning authority who may impose such conditions for the preservation of amenity as may appear to them appropriate.

Will the Minister take steps to ensure that some ingenuity is exercised before such spoliation of the beauty of the country occurs? When it is known that enormous bings will arise as a result of the workings in the area, cannot some steps be taken to ensure that the spoliation of beautiful Scottish land which has taken place in the past does not recur?

Yes, Sir. This is primarily a matter for the planning authority in co-operation with the National Coal Board.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware that the children of school age of the six families in Hillhead Quarry, Wick, are liable to spread infection at school as a result of their living conditions, which violate subsections (1), (2), and (5) of Section 16 of the Public Health Act, 1897; and what action he is taking in this matter.

The medical officer of health for the burgh reports that there is no unusual risk that the children referred to might spread disease, and in his opinion no action is necessary in this respect. The Town Council has been reminded of its obligations under the sanitary provisions of the Public Health (Scotland) Act, 1897.

Is it not the case that the British Legion ventilated this appalling case of overcrowding, in which six families are living in dilapidated huts without water or sanitation of any kind? Is my hon. Friend aware that I have seen the children covered in scabs and that action must be taken? It is quite wrong that in a civilised country conditions like this should exist.

The Town Council is considering the matter at a meeting which is being held today, and I shall let my hon. Friend know of any developments.

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he will exercise his powers under Section 48 of the Housing (Scotland) Act to require an inspection in relation to overcrowding of that part of Halkirk to which his attention has been drawn by the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland; and if he will require that proposals regarding the rehousing of the 18 persons in the two-apartment house concerned shall be submitted by the local authority in accordance with subsection 2 of the Section.

My right hon. Friend would not feel justified in taking the action suggested, having regard to the good progress which Caithness County Council is making with its general housing programme.

Under what conditions can 18 people be allowed to live in two small rooms in a house without water or sanitation? Is it really good enough for a Minister who is responsible to this House for housing to tolerate this situation for an indefinite time?

As my hon. Friend knows, the matter of housing allocation is one for the local authority. My right hon. Friend is in touch with the council about the rehousing of these persons, and he will write to my hon. Friend as soon as possible.

In view of the thoroughly unsatisfactory nature of the Answer and the state of housing in my constituency, I give notice that I shall raise this matter at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Minister of Works his policy with regard to the purchase in the United States of America of premises for use by British consuls as offices or residences as against taking such premises on lease.

My policy is to buy office or residential accommodation in the United States only where there would be clear financial or other advantage in doing so. It is not considered that at many of the posts in the United States the purchase of property would be financially attractive; but in some cases it would be advantageous. We already own property at two consular posts. The purchase of other houses is under consideration.

Will my right hon. Friend look at this matter again? Is he aware that the British residents in the United States are under the impression that successive Governments have been penny wise and pound foolish in rejecting the purchase of suitable properties and preferring expensive leaseholds instead?

The matter has been very carefully looked at. As I say, the purchase of houses in cases where it would be advantageous to buy is under consideration, but it is not always advantageous to buy.

Ought not the real criterion in every case to be the suitability of the premises rather than whether they happen to be for sale or to let? Will the Minister not look again into the very important point raised by his hon. Friend?

asked the Minister of Works (1) at what date it is proposed to start the construction of the new wing to house the Insecticide Section of the Pest Infestation Laboratory of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research at Slough;

(2) when it is proposed to provide, in addition to the provision being made for the Insecticide Section, new buildings for the Pest Infestation Laboratory of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research at Slough.

Tenders for the new Insecticide Laboratory have been received and a contract will be let shortly; building will begin as soon as possible thereafter. No date has been fixed for the erection of new buildings for other sections of the Pest Infestation Laboratory.

Is the Minister aware of the appallingly cramped conditions under which the staff are working at this site in doing work which will probably save the country millions of pounds? Will he try to get a move on?

It is hoped that the erection of the Insecticide Laboratory will begin very shortly.

asked the Minister of Works by what date it is proposed to provide at Stevenage the new accommodation planned for the Fuel Research Station of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

It is intended that building work should start in 1957 and that the first part should be completed about three years later. No date has been fixed for starting the second part of the project.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works, as representing the Lord President of the Council, if he will specify the nature and extent of the tests on refrigeration equipment recently carried out in the research ship "Sir William Hardy" and make a statement on the fish supplied for important researches to the Torry Research Station and the results of those researches.

As the reply is detailed and lengthy, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the hon. Gentleman realise that the work of this very expensive ship has been too long delayed owing to certain defects? Will he take steps to see that it gets on with the work for which it was built?

Yes, Sir. My noble Friend is aware of the position and progress is being made.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Works, as representing the Lord President of the Council, what proposals Her Majesty's Government have to give effect to the recommendations of the committee of inquiry into the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research.

The recommendations in the committee's interim report, recently published as a White Paper, form the basis of the main provisions of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research Bill, which has passed through all its stages in another place and has been introduced in this House. The committee's final report, which is not being published, does not make positive recommendations for action now but contains a number of suggestions for the consideration of the new research council which it is proposed to set up under the Bill.

But the interim report is only a very partial document. In view of the devastating criticisms which it contains, does not the Minister think that the full report should be published before this House is invited to consider the Second Reading of the Bill?

No, Sir. I do not agree that the interim report contains devastating criticisms of the D.S.I.R. I should like to make it plain that the positive recommendations contained in the first report are being written into the D.S.I.R. Bill, which has been presented to this House. The proposals made in the committee's second report are simply suggestions for the consideration of the research council, when it is set up.

Can the Minister say why the full report cannot be published before the House is invited to consider the Second Reading of the Bill?

Yes—for the very good reason that the second report of the Jephcott Committee is quite clearly a report containing suggestions for the consideration of the research council when it is set up.

beg to move, in page 16, line 6, after "out", to insert:

" or to seek directly or indirectly to give effect to or by any method whatsoever to enforce or secure the performance of ".

I think it would be convenient for the Committee if the next Amendment, in page 16, line 6, at end insert:

" (whether any such agreement or arrangement has been made by such persons or others) ".

were taken with the one moved by the hon. Member.

I quite agree, Sir Charles. I have had the opportunity of consulting my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes), who has been good enough to be a signatory to these Amendments.

Perhaps I may intervene to point out that there are three further Amendments which, I think, raise the same point. They are the Amendments in page 16, line 15, after "circumstances", insert:

"and offering the same facilities or rendering the same services either to the suppliers or to the public or otherwise ".;

In line 18, at end insert:

"or to seek directly or indirectly to give effect to or by any method whatsoever to enforce or secure the performance of".

In line 19, at end insert:

"(whether any such agreement or arrangement has been made by such persons or others)".

Yes, I think that that is so.

I am much obliged to you, Sir Charles, and to the President, for a very helpful suggestion. It certainly would be most convenient to us also to take the three Amendments to which the President has referred while the Committee is preparing itself for the ordeal of trying to finish the Committee stage this evening.

My hon. Friends and I attach some importance to the Amendment which I have moved. I am sure that the President will accept what I say when I tell him that these Amendments are put forward in no critical spirit. They are an attempt to be constructive. The right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that by putting down these Amendments we are attempting to help in the draftsmanship of this very important Clause.

We are now embarking upon the consideration of Part II of the Bill, which enshrines a very important decision of Government policy which we cordially welcome, namely, the decision to prohibit collective resale price maintenance. That decision is one of the cardinal points of policy put forward by the Monopolies Commission. The Government's decision no doubt results from the majority Report of the Commission upon collective discrimination.

I think that we would all wish to pay a tribute to the work of the Commission in bringing forward that most valuable Report. Having examined the matter in very great detail, the Commission came down conclusively in support of the view that the methods at present adopted for the collective enforcement of resale price maintenance were both excessive and dangerous. It condemned such practices as the collective boycott; the stop list, and private courts.

The Parliamentary Secretary and, I believe, the President, have quite rightly told us that although there is nothing specific in the Bill to prohibit collective boycotts, stop lists or private courts, the Government's view is that they are effectively prevented by the implications which can be read into the Clause. That view was expressed by the Parliamentary Secretary during the Second Reading debate. He said that if one doubted the matter all that one had to do was to ask what industry itself thought of the matter, and they would find that it took the view that these practices, which it has always regarded in the past as being so necessary and efficacious for enforcing collective resale price maintenance, are brought to an end by the Clause, although it contains no specific, express prohibition.

The hon. Member will realise that there is a specific exclusion of the collective boycott. It is only in regard to private courts that the prohibition is implicit and not expressly stated.

I am much obliged. The collective boycott is expressly stated, but private courts and stop lists are not.

We think that the Clause will be strengthened and made more nearly perfect if, in subsection (1, a), which makes unlawful the withholding of supplies or the refusal to supply goods, there were inserted the words:

" or to seek directly or indirectly to give effect to or by any method whatsoever to enforce or secure the performance of".

We think that it would be a salutary precaution to insert those words, because, whereas in the past the final sanction which traders have adopted is the stop list or the refusal to put a person upon an approved list, it is difficult to foresee exactly what other devices might be resorted to in the future. We want to make it abundantly clear that by no device, mechanism or invention of any kind will manufacturers and suppliers be able, directly or indirectly, to enforce a policy of collective resale price maintenance.

The Amendments in line 18 which duplicate the Amendment I have moved are necessary because as the Bill is drafted subsection (1) applies to the supply of goods and subsection (2) applies to dealers in goods. Therefore, what applies to goods applies in the second case inpari materia.

The second Amendment is somewhat different and I attach more importance to it. It is designed to make clear that this prohibition on the withholding of supplies or the refusal to supply goods, or any enforcing of collective resale price maintenance, is effective not only against the parties to the agreement, but also against persons who may not be parties to the agreement.

Hitherto, manufacturers and dealers have made these restrictive agreements to which objection is taken and, as in the case of the motor car industry, we have found that methods of enforcement have not been left to the parties who made the agreement. The party who has enforced the agreement has been a trade association, or at any rate, someone outside the agreement. Experience has shown that when it has been found necessary to control a recalcitrant retailer who wished to charge lower prices to the public than his agreement permitted, he has been called up, not before his contracting party, but before a trade association or some other body, or some kind of court, and told, "If you do not carry out your agreement with Mr. X, Mr. Y and Mr. Z will not supply you, and you will come before the court and fines will be imposed on you."

Therefore, it is not sufficient merely to say that it shall be unlawful for parties to make such an agreement. The President will appreciate that it is not sufficient merely to say to people that it shall be unlawful for them to make an agreement, or that it shall be unlawful for them to enforce the agreement. It is necessary to make sure that no one else shall endeavour, directly or indirectly, to enforce the agreement; and that is the object of the second Amendment.

I know what the President will say in reply. He will endeavour to rely on subsection (4). Of course, if he proposes to accept the Amendment, I will not say any more. But if the right hon. Gentleman proposes to resist the Amendment, as he has tried to resist some earlier Amendments, on the ground that they are not necessary because there is something else in the Bill which makes them superfluous or redundant, or something or other; if he proposes to say that subsection (4) makes them unnecessary, I will draw his attention to the fact that although subsection (4) states that

"This section applies in relation to an association…as it applies in relation to a person so carrying on business… "

That is all right so far as it goes; but it does not prevent an association, not being a party to an unlawful agreement, from taking an indirect step or introducing some kind of mechanism to enforce the agreement.

What we are endeavouring to avoid is that, whereas a party to an agreement may be effectively prevented from enforcing it, there may be someone outside the agreement who will try to enforce it. Should that position arise we should find ourselves back in the same kind of trouble as we are now in, and the door would be wide open for people to abuse the provision of the Bill. I have endeavoured to put the object of these Amendments as helpfully as I can, and I hope that they will commend themselves to the Government.

I accept entirely the spirit in which this Amendment was moved by the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. E. Fletcher). He made a very helpful and conciliatory speech. The purpose of the Amendments which we are discussing is simple. It is to ensure that collective enforcement is, in fact, banned by the Bill. The Government are absolutely at one with the Opposition in that intention. It is our purpose to ban collective enforcement of resale price maintenance and we believe that we have done so. Under subsection (1) we make it unlawful to withhold supplies or to refuse supply of goods and, under subsection (2) to withold orders for supplies of goods and, as the hon. Gentleman says, later we catch up with the associations, and so forth.

It is tempting to make certain about these things by adding further words. The danger is that by so doing one does not necessarily clarify the drafting, but may blur the issue. That would apply to the first pair of Amendments to subsections (1) and (2). But I am not prepared to say "No" on that ground alone. I am ready to see whether there are any words which may he added and which would make absolutely clear what the hon. Member and the Government wish to carry out.

The second point is one to which I am more attracted. It is not altogether a drafting point; it is a little more a policy point. It deals with the case where one group of people is seeking to enforce someone else's arrangement. There are such instances, or at any rate there might be, and I should like to examine that. I think that this Amendment may be a test of many things, including, perhaps, whether we shall finish at an early hour or a late hour tonight.

I will try to give a helpful answer to it. We are at one about policy in this matter. I do not wish to leave a loophole in the Bill. I have made my position and that of the Government plain throughout our discussions. We desire to make unlawful the collective enforcement of resale price maintenance and I hope that the Committee will accept what I have said.

The Committee will welcome the helpful way in which the right hon. Gentleman has replied to these Amendments. But there is a point of substance in the Amendment in my name which is rather different. The Amendment to which I refer is in line 15, at the end to insert:

"(c) to enforce or to attempt to enforce by any other method any condition as to the price at which goods may be resold."

The President assumed, as is assumed in the Clause, that the only method of collective enforcement of resale price maintenance is by the withholding of supplies. We accept from the right hon. Gentleman that he is anxious to prevent the collective enforcement of resale price maintenance, but we suggest that he has left a loophole here of which he may not be aware.

We all feel that we must close all possible loopholes which may be used to defeat the purpose of this Clause. We are aware—or we ought to be at the end of the long debates which we have had on this Bill—of the vast ingenuity of lawyers and the immense importance of not leaving anything to chance when lawyers are about. I suggest most seriously to the President that if he does not accept this wording, or similar wording, to reinforce the Clause he may find that his purpose of banning collective enforcement has been defeated.

The right hon. Gentleman may say that the real sanction is the stop list and that if any other action is considered it comes back to that, but it is not quite so simple as that. It is true that the most effective and most generally used sanction is the stop list, but in all our experience of the way in which collective enforcement has been working we have found that that is used as the long stop and is not the first stage of the pressure brought to bear on firms and individuals.

For example, take the case of the garage proprietor or the motor dealer who has been under pressure from the British Motor Trade Association for having evaded the list price on any article. I have had two cases sent to me. In one case a dealer was charged with having given£3 10s. for four old tyres as an inducement to purchase new tyres and had thus circumvented the list price. He felt that it was unjust but he paid a £50 fine.

That was a case in which the punishment was a fine. The President may argue that the fine was paid only because behind the fine lay the sanction of the stop list, and there is something in that argument. In another case a dealer wrote complaining that he was fined £25 for having inserted an advertisement in the local Press saying that he would make a good allowance for any car in part exchange and he pointed out that the alternative to paying the fine was to be placed on the stop list.

I suggest to the President, however, that for the purpose of clarity and to give support and reassurance to individuals who may be under pressure of this kind, we ought to make the first stage, as well as the long stop, subject to this prohibition, because a small dealer may not know that although the fine is not illegal, the stop list is, and, therefore, by banning the fine as well we may be strengthening his resistance to this kind of pressure. That is one argument which I want to advance, but there is an even more important argument.

If, in future, a dealer resists a fine in the belief that he is safe and cannot be interfered with in any way, there is the possibility that he may find himself subject to another form of blackmail brought to bear on him under subsection (1, a) of Clause 16, which enables a restrictive agreement to pass through the net provided it is necessary for the safety of the public. It might be that the Motor Trade Association could make it known to a garage proprietor resisting this kind of pressure that if he was recalcitrant he would be placed on their list of unsatisfactory dealers on the ground that he could not be trusted to carry out his work to the safety of the public.

I agree that some of this is hypothetical, but it is not impossible to think of many ways in which really astute lawyers might get round the Clause because for some unknown reason the House of Commons had restricted collective enforcement in this Clause merely to the withholding of supplies. I suggest that there could be no harm done by adding these words, which would make quite clear that the purpose is to ban collective enforcement whatever the defence of an astute lawyer might be.

I entirely included the Amendment in the name of the hon. Lady in my promise to reconsider this matter. Indeed, it is the other side of the coin—one is dealing with supply and the other deals with the acquiring end of the business. I am only anxious not to add words which might blur the intention, but I will look at the Clause again to see that it carries out the intention we all have. I will look at the question of one association enforcing the arrangements of another association. I hope that with that assurance the Committee will allow us to proceed.

We are very much obliged to the President for his reply on the first of this series of Amendments, but I am not clear about the Amendment in the name of my hon. Friend the Member for Blackburn (Mrs. Castle). There may be some doubt about that. I should like to know whether it is intended to include that Amendment within the reconsideration which the President said he would be good enough to give to the Clause.

I think that what I have said covers the same point. It is whether, in fact, we are closing the door to anything which could be called collective enforcement of resale price maintainance. I am not going to argue again whether fines are paid against the background of the stop list, but I am prepared to look at the question to make certain that our intention is carried out.

I am very glad to have the assurance given by the President. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I beg to move, in page 16, line 23, after "aforesaid" to insert:

"or who refrain or have refrained from taking steps to ensure compliance with such conditions in respect of goods supplied by them".

This Amendment has the same purpose of strengthening the method of dealing with collective enforcement. The Clause makes it unlawful for two or more persons to withhold supply from a man who cuts his price, but that does not go far enough. It should also be unlawful to agree to withhold supply from a man who, although he lays down price conditions does not choose to enforce them. It would mean collective boycott of a man until he enforced to the last inch every price list he issued and that would be an obvious intention to defeat the purpose of the Clause.

I beg to move, in page 16, line 27, to leave out paragraph (a).

On the face of it, this Amendment appears to be on a similar point to that in Clause 6 subsection (1). The President gave an undertaking to look into the question of how far partnership agreements would come within the Bill. I submit to the Committee that whereas we agreed that there was a case for having a provision of this sort in Clause 6. there could be no similar ground for having it in Clause 19.

This Clause relates exclusively to collective resale price maintenance. Perhaps, unlike the majority of hon. Members on both sides of the Committee, I am not an enthusiast for the abolition of resale price maintenance. I agree with what the President said in July, that very often the collective way is the only way to enforce resale price maintenance, but I do not want to argue that point now. I want to see, if we are to begin to have the abolition of collective resale price maintenance that it is fair as between small and large firms and as between manufacturers and retailers alike.

The Monopolies Commission said, on the question of tyres, that the abolition in that case would probably result to the disadvantage of the small manufacturer. As drafted, I think that this subsection is a clear invitation to companies to form trusts. Why, for example, should Unilever be in a position, if a trader cut the price of margarine to be able to stop his supply and to discriminate in the supply of ice-cream, sausages, fish and all the rest of the things which it deals with in its enormous empire?

In the tobacco trade we would not want one large manufacturer to be in the position to stop the whole of its supplies where the small manufacturer had not corresponding powers. It seems that much more than one advantage flows from having various sections of a firm in separate companies, and if organisations want the advantages of separate legal entities they must take some of the disadvantages as well. There is no case for giving monopolies or inter-connected bodies corporate privileges in this collective resale price maintenance which are not open to smaller firms.

It does not seem to me that there is any justification for the exception in this case, which may have got in as a consequential provision following that in Clause 6. if inter-connected bodies corporate can be given that special exemption in Clause 6, it is contrary to the whole spirit of this Clause to include this subsection. I hope that the President will be able to accept the Amendment, or give us an assurance that he will introduce a subsequent Amendment at a later stage.

I hope that the Committee will be concilliatory about this point, which is one that we have discussed before. In Jaw, the partnership and the inter-connected body corporate are to be treated as one person.

I thought that the whole point of forming several companies was that they would be, in law, different persons. Surely the right hon. Gentleman is now going right against the whole point of company legislation.