asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of the gross national product was spent by Government and by private industry on scientific research and development, excluding market research and capital development, in 1939, 1950 and 1955.

The proportion in 1955 is estimated at about 2 per cent. Between one-third and one-half of this work was done in Government laboratories and nationalised industries, and a large part of the remainder was financed by the Government. I regret that there are no estimates for 1939 and 1950.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a definite, established correlation between investment in research and an increase in national productivity? Would he not also agree that in the United States of America there is far greater investment in research and, therefore, far greater results? Will he advise his right hon. Friend of these facts, if he agrees with them, with a view to reliefs in this direction being given in the forthcoming Budget?

The Advisory Council on Scientific Policy is considering the whole question of the extent to which the country's resources are devoted to research and the results of this investigation will be forthcoming.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of the equity and fixed interest bearing capital of iron and steel companies formerly vested in the Iron and Steel Corporation, respectively, has, up to the present, been transferred to private owners.

In view of the changes in the capital structure of many companies it is not possible to give the answer in the form sought by the right hon. Member; but I am sending him a copy of the third Annual Report of the Agency in which the position is explained in detail.

Even if the right hon. Gentleman cannot give me exactly what I ask for, would it be fair to conclude that after three years of so-called denationalisation the Government have handed over control of policy of 75 per cent. of the productive capacity of the steel industry but have left the nation to hold the baby of fixed interest bearing securities to the extent of something like 75 per cent.? Is it not time that the Government made a considered statement of their policy in regard to the denationalisation of the steel industry?

There has been no change in policy. The right hon. Gentleman had better study the figures first.

If there has been no change in policy, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the nation was informed in the Elections of 1951 and 1955 that denationalisation would mean merely handing over the control of the industry while leaving the fixed interest bearing capital in the hands of the nation?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what directions have been given by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency to iron and steel companies whose capital stock is held by it as to the amounts of their gross profits which shall be reinvested in the industry or held in reserve.

It is the general practice of the Agency to allow subsidiary companies to retain the balance of net profits after payment of dividend at the same rate as in 1948.

Is this the policy now being followed in Wales? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as a result of what has been going on, the greater part of the steel industry in Wales is still the property of the people and that, certainly in Wales, when they voted in the two Elections of which I have spoken, the people did not give a mandate for the denationalisation of iron and steel? May we have a promise that the Government will now stop as far as they have gone and leave the industries of Wales in the hands of the people?

Denationalisation of steel was decided by Parliament. I do not see that the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary question has anything to do with his original Question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what rate of interest would now be payable on £1 in order to produce an increment equivalent in real value to the interest which would have been paid on £1 in 1938.

If I have understood the hon. Member correctly, the rate of interest would have to be 2·7 times as great as in 1938.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say why no change has been made in the interest payable on small savings such as are placed in the Post Office Savings Bank, since the decline in the internal purchasing power of the £, plus the decline in the real value of the interest paid, means that a person who saved £1 in 1938 has, in fact, lost 4s.?

If the hon. Member is referring to the rate of interest paid by the Post Office Savings Bank, it has, of course, been the same since 1860, and many things have happened since then.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what financial increment has accrued to a person who placed £1 in Post Office savings in 1946 and left it to fructify.

Interest on £1 deposited in the Post Office Savings Bank in January, 1946, and left to fructify would now amount to 5s. 6d.

Yes, but is the hon. Gentleman aware that a person saving £1 since 1946, owing to the decline in its real value, despite the addition of compound interest at the rate of 2½ per cent, would still be left 2s. 6d. worse off?

He would be better off than if he had not saved it.

Would my hon. Friend say what would have happened to that investment if it had been in Daltons?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he will take to encourage small savings.

A number of steps to encourage small savings were taken in 1956, and a marked increase has already followed.

What steps is the hon. Gentleman going to recommend to encourage small savings in the Post Office?

If the hon. Member is referring to the fact that the Post Office rate of interest is unchanged, I would remind him that it is a fact that the National Savings Movement has itself recommended that this rate should not vary with market rates of interest.

Would my hon. Friend consider adjusting the amount deducted from National Assistance of recipients' small savings with a view to encouraging people to continue saving, even though they are on National Assistance, in view of the fact that at the moment it is more profitable for them to spend their savings and draw extra National Assistance when they have spent them?

That is not a question for me but for the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) when he intends to introduce legislation transferring responsibility for the Public Record Office to the Lord Chancellor, and giving legislative effect to other recommendations of the Committee on Departmental Records, where this is necessary;

(2) when he proposes to appoint, as official head of the Public Record Department, a Keeper of the Records, in accordance with the recommendation contained in paragraph 142 of the Report of the Committee on Departmental Records.

Legislation is in preparation to permit the transfer of responsibility for the, Public Record Office to the Lord Chancellor and the appointment of an official head of the Public Record Office, with the title of Keeper of the Records. I cannot yet say when it will be possible for it to be introduced.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it is getting on for three years now since the Departmental Committee issued its Report, and that it is more than twenty months since we were told that legislation was to be introduced? Cannot he give us an assurance that it will be brought forward this Session? What consideration has been given to the aspect which interests the public most, namely, the period after which records are to be transferred to the Public Record Office and become available for inspection by historians and students? What consideration has been given to the advertisement of this important post of Keeper of the Records? Is it to be filled from inside the Civil Service, or is it to be thrown open, like other public appointments', to suitably qualified candidates?

Perhaps my hon. Friend would give me notice of those last three detailed questions. As to his first two supplementary questions, it is desired to introduce this legislation as soon as practicable, but I cannot give any guarantee of its being introduced in the present Session.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the credit restrictions have caused the postponement of so many building projects in Norwich and Norfolk that there is now heavy and increasing unemployment among building trades workers in the area; and if he will now take appropriate steps to relax these restrictions at least for local authority projects such as public improvements and building and slum clearance.

Although unemployment in Norwich has increased during the past year, my right hon. Friend cannot agree that it would yet be right to encourage unrestricted building.

Is the Economic Secretary aware that special circumstances exist in this area? There is no alternative employment in Norwich or Norfolk. Does he not agree that the hardships being suffered by these people are direct results of the Government's financial policy? Does he not think, therefore, that there is a duty upon the Government to do something to relieve those hardships?

I think the hon. Member has a Question to the Minister of Labour and National Service, whose business it is much more than mine.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the estimated loss of revenue in a full financial year at present rates of tax if personal earned income, marriage and children's allowances were allowed for Surtax.

About £34 million.

Is my hon. Friend aware that when I asked a similar Question last year, asking what would be the cost then of raising the Surtax level to £3,000, the answer was £27 million? Would not the figure now, in answer to my present Question, be rather less than that? In any case, whatever the figure is, is it not a small price to pay for lessening a little the heavy and unjust burden of taxation on brains in this country?

I cannot, of course, anticipate my right hon. Friend's Budget statement, but my right hon. Friend will have noted my hon. Friend's point.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the gross salary which in 1938 would have given a married man with two children the same purchasing value after tax as he receives today from a gross salary of £2,000.

For a married man with two children a gross salary of about £620 in 1938–39 would have given about the same purchasing power, after tax, as a salary of £2,000 at the present time.

Does my hon. Friend think that a level of purchasing power of £620 is the right level at which to start Surtax? Is he aware that it is because we in this country have the highest taxation in the Commonwealth on brains that so many of our able young men and women are thinking of emigration?

The starting level for Surtax is a matter for the Budget, which I cannot anticipate, but my right hon. Friend will be aware of my hon. Friend's point.

Is it not a fact that there are only about 250,000 in this category anyway? After making allowance for the fact that only a few have young children, we are dealing with only a very few thousand, and, therefore, the case is not half as strong as the hon. Member for Wycombe (Mr. John Hall) makes it out to be.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that, owing to a new ruling by Customs and Excise, the tax on Highland dancing competitions has been raised from 2½d. to 6½d. on a 2s. 6d. seat; that this compares unfairly with the rate charged at ballet dancing, variety entertainment or the Welsh Eistedfodd; and whether he will give the matter his attention.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why competitive Highland dancing is now classified under Scale 2 of the Entertainments duty.

Scale 2 of Entertainments Duty covers admissions to watch such dancing as cannot be regarded as ballet or as variety entertainment. Whether Highland dancing competitions can be so regarded depends upon the circumstances of each case, and the classification of a particular competition may have been altered as a result of changes in its programme.

Yes, but is my hon. Friend aware that in many cases the classification turned out unfortunately? Would he be prepared to look into this matter again, because Highland dancing is a very desirable pastime?

The classification is, of course, a matter of law. As I pointed out, it may well be that the character of an entertainment changes from one year to another, but I will gladly look at any case which my hon. and gallant Friend has in mind.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that Ellen MacGregor and Rob Roy won every competition from the Mull of Galloway to the Mull of Kintyre without being asked for one penny piece of taxation and that this tax in Scotland today is a tax to finance the Government's misadventures in Egypt?

I cannot say whether the performances of the artistes to which the hon. Gentleman refers would properly be classified either as ballet or as variety entertainment.

In view of the fact that Highland dancing is immensely superior from a cultural point of view to ballet in the ordinary sense or variety—

Or rock 'n roll. It is much better than that.

—will not my hon. Friend give this matter very careful attention to see whether he cannot do something about it?

Certainly I will look at any case which my hon. and gallant Friend brings to my attention.

Is not this a very short-sighted policy from the point of view of the Exchequer, for a large quantity of whisky is consumed at these meetings? Would it not pay the hon. Gentleman to take off this tax and thus catch more whisky drinkers?

Not unless the whisky were consumed inside rather than outside the enclosure.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will provide for the amendment of the Finance Acts so as to control the tax liability of payments of capital sums now made free of tax as compensation for alleged loss of earnings under service contracts when those contracts are cancelled by agreement.

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

While thanking my hon. Friend for that illuminating answer, may I ask him to bear in mind the fact that we have an enviable reputation in the world as patriotic taxpayers, due to the fairness of our system, and that while these methods of tax dodging are permitted our reputation is in question? Will he advise my right hon. Friend to deal with this tax dodging method speedily and ruthlessly?

My hon. Friend has already brought this matter to my right hon. Friend's attention.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will, in considering his Budget Statement, provide for the amendment of the law affecting pensions for the self-employed and controlling directors so as to permit them to include life assurance cover in the event of death for the benefit of dependants in lieu of the present law and practice of merely returning on death the premium paid to that date.

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

While thanking my hon. Friend again for an answer, may I ask whether he will convey to my right hon. Friend the fact that this change can be made without adding the cost of a penny in taxation? The problem of dealing with the dependants of men who die early, when between 25 and 45 years of age, is more serious than the problem of providing a pension at 65. As the change can be made within a broader scheme, will my hon. Friend ask the Chancellor to consider it?

I will convey that view to him.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what request he has had from the Association of the Councils of the British Communities in Egypt for financial assistance in order to set up an office in this country; and what was his reply.

The Association asked for an initial grant of £15,000 and assistance in obtaining office accommodation, but it was decided that no assistance could be given from public funds.

Does my hon. Friend not agree that the Association has a useful function in the vetting of British subjects from Egypt whose property has been sequestrated?

I am aware that the Association does that, but the difficulty is that these claims would have to be vetted by the Foreign Office in any case and a duplication of work would be involved.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider the introduction of legislation to consolidate the law relating to direct taxation.

The Income Tax law was consolidated in 1952. I do not think that further consolidation is necessary at present.

Am I not right in saying that there are about 16 Statutes in force bearing on Income Tax alone? Would my hon. Friend give further consideration to this point and bear in mind that it would be highly desirable not only to have the law in one hand but also to have it more simple? Would he not also agree, that it would be very much easier to get it simplified if it were less penal?

Consolidation is not necessarily simplification, and there has been consolidation within the last four or five years. The Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income recommended consolidation over ten years, beginning from 1962, and we have not quite got there yet.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the level of company taxation in the United Kingdom compares with that in force in those European countries which support the proposals for a Common Market.

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

Whilst I am very grateful to my right hon. Friend for that answer, and I am certain that the information will be most interesting, may I ask whether he will accept on the part of the Government the long-term objective of equating the level of taxation in the country with that in all the other countries participating in the Common Market in order that our industries shall not continue to be crippled, in even worse conditions, by continued penal taxation?

Taxation here is high, of course, but if my hon. Friend will study the figures he will find that there are enormous variations in these countries and comparisions are not easy to make.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the reduction in the Bank Rate, he will exclude from the operation of the credit squeeze and credit limitation money borrowed for house purchase.

As my right hon. Friend pointed out in his statement on 7th February, the reduction in the Bank Rate was not a signal for the relaxation of credit.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that, in addition to its political desirability, on which I trust we are both agreed, this is also deflationary in its object in so far as if people are paying for a house or repaying a loan for house purchase they cannot buy motor cars, television sets and other forms of consumable goods, the purchase of which my right hon. Friend wishes to restrict in the home market?

I entirely agree that house ownership is very desirable.

Is there any reason at all for having high interest rates for house ownership, and is not this an obvious case for some selectivity in interest rates policy?

This matter has been raised before, and I doubt whether it is practicable. The rate at which a building society lends depends upon the rate at which it can raise money.

Does the Minister's reply mean that the Tory Party has now forsaken its belief in a property-owning democracy and that, far from encouraging people, they are taking financial means to discourage them?

No, Sir.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the result of recent negotiations concerning the salaries of university teachers.

My right hon. Friend is not yet in a position to make a statement.

Is not this a very disappointing start to the new negotiating machinery which the Chancellor instituted a year ago? Is it not a fact that the University Grants Committee presented the Treasury with its final recommendations over two months ago? Would not the right hon. Gentleman speed matters up?

This is an important matter and the desirability of an early statement is recognised.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will introduce legislation requiring building societies to reduce interest rates to borrowers to correspond with reductions in the Bank Rate.

No, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman not agree to set up a committee to probe the rather tricky methods of manipulating interest charges employed by these money-lenders, which are bitterly resented by hundreds of thousands of house-purchasers who discovered too late how the dice are always loaded against them by their so-called benefactors?

I think that the hon. Member's statement is entirely unfounded.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the amount of the Treasury contribution to State retirement pensions for 1956; and what was the cost to the Treasury of the rebates allowed in taxation of private concerns for their superannuation schemes for the year 1956.

The cost of allowing employers' contributions to superannuation schemes for their employees to be deducted in arriving at taxable profits is estimated at present to be in the region of £80 million a year.

The estimated total cost to the Exchequer of Civil Service and Armed Forces pensions for the financial year 1956–57 is £82·6 million.

Retirement pensions payable under the National Insurance Scheme are the principal benefits payable from the National Insurance Fund, to which the Exchequer contribution in 1956–57 is expected to be £96·75 million: in addition, the estimated cost of non-contributory old-age pensions in 1956–57 is £15·3 million.

Is it not evident from these figures that the cost of these superannuation schemes of private firms is mainly borne by the Treasury? Is it not rather inequitable that the general taxpayer, and the State pensioner in particular, should be asked to contribute so lavishly to the specially favourable retirement pensions of the equivalent of one-third of the workers engaged in our industries?

If the hon. Member will look carefully at the reply, I do not think that he will find it bears out his contention. In any case, there is no analogy between the Exchequer contribution and the cost of paying State pensions on the one hand and the contributions of a private firm on the other, for if firms were to pay the same sums as additions to wages these would equally be a deduction for tax purposes.

Is not the hon. Gentleman's figure of £80 million for tax rebate on private superannuation schemes too small for the total tax rebate for all forms of private saving, since the Phillips Committee gave a figure of £100 million two years ago? Is it not rather extraordinary that more public money should be used for fairly high pensions for a third of the community than for much lower pensions for the remaining two-thirds?

The £80 million relates to the Question, but it does not follow that if these contributions did not rank to be allowed against taxable profits that amount of tax extra would be collected.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that these contributions do not come from public funds but come from the profits created by the brains of these men and, therefore, the more he allows in this way the more he will encourage the managerial class on whom the welfare of the country so largely depends?

That is another ground on which there is no real analogy between the figures which the hon. Member for Norwich, North (Mr. Paton) sought to compare.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will permit the use of Egyptian sterling accounts for the payment of sums due to British manufacturers for goods in transit from their works to Egypt during late July and early August last, in view of the fact that manufacturers could not have had any prior knowledge of the Government's intention to prevent payment for goods so despatched, and that the settlement of these outstanding accounts would not benefit Egypt.

I am afraid that any relaxation of our existing restrictions must wait until the negotations whch we contemplate with the Egyptian Government on claims and counter-claims.

As this is really quite a small matter and obviously these few firms have a prior claim on any Egyptian sterling balances here, would it not be fair, as well as sensible, to allow these claims to be settled straight away?

I quite agree that there are many difficult cases, but the only thing to do is to wait for a general settlement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that the retaining fee and expenses of men employed in the service of the Royal National Lifeboat Institution are greatly and unreasonably reduced by heavy Income Tax; and, in view of the smallness of these fees and expenses as compared with the work for which they are paid, if he will consider and implement a substantial reduction in the rate of Income Tax for which these men are liable.

I could not agree that these particular payments should be treated exceptionally for Income Tax purposes.

Does not the Minister realise that these men perform extremely dangerous and difficult work for wretchedly small pay, and that the amount of Income Tax for which they are liable is disproportionate to the amount of their pay? Will the Minister look into that with a view to seeing that justice is done to them?

I am sure that the hon. and learned Gentleman will realise that it would be quite impossible to differentiate between one man's earnings and another's for tax purposes according to the danger or value of the calling in which they were earned.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the proportion of foreign students in relation to the total number of students at British universities at the present time.

The latest available figures relate to the academic year 1955–56, when foreign students accounted for 4·4 per cent. of the total number of students at universities in Great Britain.

Has my hon. Friend any figures indicating whether this is an increase or a decrease on previous years?

I shall be glad to look into that point.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what Government-sponsored or assisted student hostels exist in this country; and what amount has been contributed by Her Majesty's Government to the appeal launched by the National Union of Students for a new International Student Centre and hostel in London.

A substantial contribution from Government funds is made towards the cost of establishing and maintaining hostels and other residential accommodation at universities and technical colleges. In addition, the British Council runs students' hostels at London, Edinburgh and Sheffield, and the Government have promised a contribution of E200,000 towards the cost of an International Hall of Residence at London University. No contribution to the appeal launched by the National Union of Students has been made nor, so far as I know, requested.

Will my hon. Friend cease using the term "Government funds"? Is he not aware that the Government have no funds except what they raise from the taxpayer?

asked the Secretary to the Treasury why the eighteen gold coins found recently in Moody Street, Congleton, and declared to be treasure trove, are all being disposed of to the Grosvenor Museum at Chester; and whether it will be possible for a few of these coins to be retained in the Borough of Congleton in accordance with the wishes of the civic authorities.

The British Museum is entrusted with the disposal of finds of this kind in England. In accordance with normal practice, the Congleton hoard, not being required for the National Collection, was offered as a whole to the Grosvenor Museum at Chester, which is the nearest museum to Congleton and has a fine collection of coins. Custody and loan of the coins are now matters for the Grosvenor Museum.

Will my hon. Friend look at this matter again, and is he aware that a few years ago, in similar circumstances, the borough of Shrewsbury was allowed to retain some of the coins found? Is he further aware that Congleton received its Charter in 1272 and that there is a public library with similar coins where these could be shown? Will he bear in mind that, unless he reconsiders this matter, Congleton will present a petition to this House and I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment?

Answer.

Does not my hon. Friend think it desirable that all areas in this country should take an interest in their local archeology, and is he aware that this is the very way to discourage it? Not only from the cultural point of view, but also for the sake of safeguarding archæological finds and other things of interest, this should be done, and that is the wrong way to go about it.

Those are considerations which the British Museum has in mind in advising upon the disposal of these funds. An important factor is that hoards of this kind should, where possible, be kept together for purposes of research. It is of some historical interest what the coins were which were found at one time and place. So far as local exhibition is concerned, I am told that Congleton has been offered facilities for loan and obtaining copies of these coins.

On a point of order, Sir. It is an insult to Congleton to be offered copies—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—and I give notice that I shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the difficulty being experienced in filling vacancies for inspector of taxes without lowering standards, if he will review the salary scales of these inspectors with a view to increasing them.

The salaries of inspectors of taxes have recently been raised in the light of the improvement in salary scales for comparable grades recommended by the Royal Commission on the Civil Service.

Is my hon. Friend quite satisfied that the salaries offered are sufficiently high to attract the best type of person into this very important job?

The increases were made only last July and, therefore, it is really too early to tell whether they are having the desired effect.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what was the commencing salary of a chief executive officer in 1939; what should this be today to compensate for higher taxation and increased cost of living; how much of the increase is due to each of these two factors; and what is the commencing salary of this grade today.

In 1939 the commencing salary of a chief executive officer was £900, and his net income, if married with one child, was £794. To compensate for the increased cost of living, the equivalent net income would now be £2,080, for which a gross income of £3,180 would be needed at today's rates of taxation. The commencing salary of this grade is now £1,635, yielding a net income of £1,299.

Does not this represent a reduction in their standard of living of about 40 per cent. in these cases? Is my hon. Friend aware that this trend is true, if not in the same degree, for most of the professional or middle classes of this country today? Do Her Majesty's Government approve of this trend and, if not, what action is it proposed to take to arrest it?

Join the Middle-class Alliance.

The first deduction at any rate is broadly true, though I think the fall is slightly less than the figure which my hon. Friend mentioned.

Could the hon. Gentleman estimate how much of the loss indicated in the Question and answer is attributable to the cost of an emergency that occurred between 1939 and 1945?

If the hon. Gentleman would like me to split up this change before and after 1945, I will willingly do so if he will put down a Question.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the progress of the investigation by the White Fish Authority into the price of fish.

The White Fish Authority's report on their investigation of distributive costs and earnings is now in the hands of the printers, and should be on sale early next month. I will arrange for a copy to be placed in the Library of the House.

Whilst thanking the Minister for that statement, which has taken a long time to come out, can he say what are the effects of this report, and what classes of fish it is likely to affect?

I will ask the hon. Gentleman to await the report, because it is a mass of detail and I think he will find it interesting.

Would the right hon. Gentleman look into the current difficulties of the fishing industry, owing to the bad weather and the increased cost of fuel oil, to see whether it can be afforded any relief?

I am conscious of the present difficulties. The weather has improved lately for fishing. I am not seeking to take immediate credit for that fact, but the landings of fish have been somewhat better in the last week.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he has now received from the National Federation of Fish Fryers a complaint that the further rise in the price of fish caused by the Suez Emergency Surcharge has led to a fall in sales and seriously threatens their trade; and what reply he has sent.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he proposes to take in response to the complaint by the National Federation of Fish Fryers about the adverse effect on their industry of the extra cost of oil to trawler owners.

I have received a copy of the circular letter dated 30th January to which the hon. Member presumably refers. The circular did not call for a reply, but I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to a Question from the hon. Member for Feltham (Mr. Hunter) on 4th February. The recent high prices have been due to the exceptionally low level of landings resulting from the prolonged gales in recent weeks and have not been caused by the Suez Emergency Surcharge which the trawler owners have temporarily imposed.

In reply to a Question on 4th February, the Parliamentary Secretary referred to the high price of fish being due to the persistent bad weather at sea. Why do the Government persistently blame bad weather for their misdoings when the circular to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred states specifically that a surcharge of 6s. per kit of 10 stone on all fish sold has been imposed to meet the increased cost of fuel and diesel oil owing to the Suez crisis? Why does he evade the consequences of his own action?

No. It is the hon. Member who is wrong in this case. The surcharge is applied, but where the market price is substantially above the minimum price plus the surcharge, the surcharge has no effect. That is the point. The present price, which is substantially above the minimum price plus the surcharge, has been due almost solely to the bad weather.

Does not the Minister agree that the surcharge, arising from the increase in the price of oil, should be borne by all fish landed, including fish going to meal factories, and not merely by fish for human consumption?

The point is that the surcharge is at present not being borne by anybody. As evidence of that, a week after the surcharge was applied the market price was 1s. or so lower than in the week before the surcharge was applied.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is now in a position to make a statement on the proposal to stipulate a minimum meat content of beef and pork sausages.

Certain technical difficulties are involved and I must ask the hon. Member to be patient a little longer.

But is it not a fact that I have been patient for quite a long time now, and is it not also a fact that the Food Standards Committee, after careful consideration, recommended that there should be a minimum meat content in the sausage, and will not the Minister get a hit tough with the vested interests who want to be able to continue to diddle the housewives with phoney fillings?

The hon. Gentleman has been patient in this matter, but on an important point the members of the Food Standards Committee were divided. I must acknowledge that I find the sausage to be a much more complex entity than I had ever imagined.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) whether the Dartmoor, and similar ponies, now being exported to Canada from Glasgow and other ports, are examined individually by his veterinary officers and rested beforehand; and if he will give an assurance that none will be exported in an unfit condition;

(2) whether he will prohibit the export to Canada of any pony likely to foal while on board ship;

(3) whether, in order to avoid the necessity of using his statutory powers, he will institute discussions with the commercial interests concerned to get voluntary agreements to prevent the export of ponies via the long Atlantic crossing during the worst winter months, to secure separate penning in the ships, and to arrange, if possible, shipment from other ports than Glasgow in order to save the long overland journey beforehand.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is satisfied as to the conditions under which Dartmoor and other ponies are exported to Canada; and if he will take all steps necessary to ensure that none of these ponies are exported unless in a fit condition to undertake the journey across the Atlantic.

Discussions have been held with the shipping companies, and with their co-operation this traffic is being closely supervised. The ponies are inspected by veterinary officers who satisfy themselves that each pony is fit to travel before it is shipped. Any pony likely to foal on board ship would not be allowed to travel. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and I are satisfied that the steps we have taken should prevent any unnecessary suffering by ponies being exported even in winter.

Could not the right hon. Gentleman try to make a little more progress? Is he not aware that one of the worst troubles is the long Atlantic crossing in winter? Could he not get the commercial interests voluntarily to stop exporting in the worst months? Secondly, could he not do something about the question of separate penning? Is he aware that what happens is that the unbroken ponies do great damage to each other in their terror during a stormy Atlantic crossing, and that it would be a help if he could get the commercial interests to obey at least those two requests?

I will pay the greatest attention to what the hon. Gentleman has said, because I know how interested he is in this important matter of humanity to animals. On the two points he has specifically asked me about, I am doubtful if much trouble arises through winter crossings, as such, but we are in close touch with the shipping companies.

On the second point of separate penning, I am assured that separate penning might even be a drawback. At present the pens are designed to hold about five wild or wildish ponies, and technical advice at present is that these ponies are unaccustomed to being alone—like Members of Parliament, I think—and that if they were put into separate pens they would become even more alarmed than they are at present.

Further, because I treat this matter seriously, I want to say that the main trouble occurred over the first consignment, and that as under the present law there was no need for veterinary inspection of that consignment, it was not made. Since then, the veterinary inspection has been done very carefully and the results, I think, have been reasonably satisfactory.

My right hon. Friend knows that I have written to him about the export of Dartmoor ponies, about which I am worried. Will he satisfy himself that there is adequate veterinary inspection? I understand that in the past this has not been so and a number of in-foal mares have died en route. These poor little ponies are quite wild, and, therefore, it must be a horrible experience for them.

I can give my hon. Friend an assurance that I will keep in very close touch with the veterinary inspection side. He will be glad to know that, apart from the first consignment, only four ponies out of 500 have died, but I agree that even that position is not satisfactory.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give an assurance that, at all future conferences held by his Department where the rights of the estuarial industrial net fishermen of this country are under consideration, representatives of these interests will be asked to attend.

I can assure my hon. Friend that if proposals should be made which would involve changes in public netting rights the net fishermen will have full opportunity for stating their views.

While I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply, is he aware that these netting rights have existed continuously in many instances since Magna Charta?

Yes, Sir, and I will make sure that all the fishery interests are given opportunity to make representations before any change is made in those rights.

Does the right hon. Gentleman succeed in attending or even being represented at the various conferences which he is expected to attend in order to represent his three-fold Ministry?

I attend as many as I can. The conferences in question were called by my own Department and, therefore, were attended by officials of my Department.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he takes to be formally represented at statutory tribunals considering cases involving the taking of agricultural land in Wales for non-agricultural uses; and if he will make a statement.

It is not the practice of my Department either in Wales or in England to be represented at public inquiries held under the planning or compulsory purchase procedures on the instructions of another Minister.

Can my right hon. Friend say, then, how he indicates the attitude of the Ministry of Agriculture in cases of this kind? Also, how does he indicate the attitude of the Ministry in cases like the projected taking of land at Treweryn in North Wales for the purposes of a reservoir for Liverpool?

The practice is that my Department gives advice to other Ministries when that advice is requested by other Ministries.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the matter is becoming of increasing importance in both Wales and England? Is not the time fast approaching when his attitude and his decision should be paramount in these matters?

I think the Government will be reviewing these questions in the light of the recommendations of the Franks Committee.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what discussions he has had with the National Farmers' Union regarding the Heneage Report; and whether he has come to a decision to implement any of the recommendations of this Report, particularly those relating to land drainage.

The Heneage Committee's recommendations have been fully discussed with all the interests concerned, including the National Farmers' Union. I am not yet able to add to the reply given to the hon. Member for Anglesey (Mr. C. Hughes) on 6th December last, but I will do so as soon as possible.

While thanking the Minister for that Answer, can he tell us when he will be able to do so? In view of the flooding, which is so prevalent in these villages and the low-lying areas, it is most important we do something about this very difficult matter.

I could not agree more with the last part of the hon. Member's supplementary question. It is important that we should do something. In reply to an earlier Question, I indicated that I hoped to be able to make some progress on perhaps a more limited front, and I hope quite shortly to be able to make a statement on that subject.

In view of the fact that the Report has been issued for some years—by Lieut.-Colonel Heneage, the former Member for Louth—and since the people of Louth and in the coastal districts feel a sense of grievance, will he not do something fairly quickly and not leave the matter lying on the table for so long?

I repeat that I hope very shortly to be able to make some statement.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is now able to make a statement on long-term improvement grants amplifying Command Paper 23.

I would refer the hon. Member to the replies given to my hon. Friend the Member for Norwich, South (Mr. Rippon) on 12th February and to my hon. Friend the Member for Norfolk, South (Mr. J. E. B. Hill) on 30th January.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that many farmers would be anxious to start preliminary work, which perhaps would qualify for grant, if they knew what grant they would receive? Does he not agree that it is essential they should get their information while builders are ready and available to start the work?

I should like to repeat what I have said already, that farmers and landowners must be very careful to acquaint themselves with the replies I have given, because no grant will be payable on any work which has been undertaken and started prior to authorisation after the passing of the legislation.

In view of the obvious difficulties arising from the announcement of the policy and its implementation, will the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he will expedite the introduction of the Bill?

I am very anxious that the Bill should be introduced at the earliest possible moment for the reasons the hon. Gentleman knows very well.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress is being made in the encouragement of greater efficiency and economy by the standardisation of spare parts in farm machinery.

The British Standards Institution has issued twelve standards for tractors and agricultural machinery which have been adopted by many manufacturers. Work on other standards is proceeding.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the work is proceeding exceedingly slowly and that many farmers are verb worried about the fact that there is no standardisation, even in simple things like nuts and bolts.

I agree with the hon. Member that one is always hoping for faster progress in matters of this kind, but there is the Agricultural Machinery and Implements Industry Standards Committee which has been studying this matter and has produced the results to which I have referred. Therefore, there is some progress all the time, but I am assured that there are very great technical difficulties. I, too, wish progress were faster.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware that in several foreign countries there are special schemes which relieve farmers of the full effects of the rise in price of petrol used in agricultural production; and whether he will consider some similar scheme to keep down the cost of food.

I am aware that there are schemes in several foreign countries which relieve farmers of part of the taxation on petrol, but such a scheme would have little effect in reducing food costs.

If the right hon. Gentleman will not introduce such a scheme, will he at least take account of the indirect subsidies which these countries have when comparing our cost of production with the cost of production in neighbouring European countries which have these subsidies?

That is a fair enough point. I wanted to make the point that there is little home-produced food at present which is sold at prices which reflect production costs. It is sold at the best price which can be obtained in the market regardless of costs.

Will the rising price of petrol be taken into account in the Price Review now taking place?

This element, as my hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary said in reply to an earlier Question, is an item which will be taken into consideration at the Annual Review.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the horticultural industry, the one most affected by this, gets no benefit from the Price Review and is an industry where labour-saving appliances are particularly required and where most of the gadgets have to be driven by petrol and cannot be converted to using other fuels?

My hon. Friend will agree that the horticultural industry obtains some benefit from some of the production grants.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take special steps to bring to the notice of farmers the urgent need to take early delivery of seeds and fertilisers this spring so that maximum use can be made of railway delivery, and thus help the national transport situation.

I will gladly do what I can to bring to the notice of farmers the special importance in present circumstances of early ordering so as to help merchants to plan their deliveries in the most economical way and also avoid the risk of delay in deliveries when spring cultivations start, and I am confident that the trades concerned will be doing so too.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that speed is the essence of success in this matter? Will he take every opportunity of putting this over to the farming community with as much speed as possible?

I certainly will, and I think that the Question which my hon. Friend has put down will help in that way.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that probably the best way of doing this is to get something inserted into the script of a well-known serial which is on the radio every night?

I think I know to what my hon. Friend is referring.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will make a statement on the export in recent months of farm produce, particularly grain, beef, cattle, and eggs, to the Continent, stating the amount of subsidy, in price guarantees, paid on these exports.

Exports of farm produce in recent months have been relatively small. Cattle was the most important item, and my hon. Friend was given particulars about these exports on 31st January. Cereal grains exported were mainly for use as seed. Exports of other produce, including eggs, were trivial in amount. The payments due to producers under price guarantee arrangements in respect of the quantities of farm produce exported in the second half of last year cannot be calculated precisely but would not exceed £500,000.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the latest estimate he has made of the quantity of potatoes of the 1956 crop which will be surplus to human requirements; if there is likely to be an export market for any considerable quantity; and whether the Potato Marketing Board consults with his Department about the disposal of surplus potatoes for stockfeed and manufacturing purposes, so as to keep down the charge falling on the Exchequer.

The Potato Marketing Board's census of potato stocks in Great Britain on 1st January suggests that there will be a surplus over human requirements of more than half a million tons. Export possibilities are not substantial in relation to this quantity but are being actively explored. The Board is in close and continuous touch with my Department regarding disposal of the surplus.