asked the President of the Board of Trade why it is necessary for a person or firm to obtain a licence to export works of art over £500 in value to countries outside the sterling area; and why the term "works of art" is interpreted so widely by Government Departments that it includes book labels produced from a hand-engraved copper plate and low-priced reprints from other hand-engraved plates, whereas mechanical reproductions are not so included.

Exports of works of art are controlled to conserve objects of national importance and to support the exchange control. There is no precise definition of a work of art, but for control purposes it is held to include hand-engraved plates and hand-printed impressions thereof. Some of these are very valuable: those which are not may be exported freely under an open general licence provided that the value of any consignment does not exceed £500.

Will the President do his best to remove all the restrictions that he can from this industry which, although small, can be quite a useful little dollar-earner?

Yes, Sir. I certainly will, but just at the moment it is not possible to relax the exchange control provisions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will reconsider the decision of his predecessor to withdraw the Government grant from the British Industries Fair; and whether, in consultation with the main industrial organisations concerned, he will reallocate the money formerly spent on publicity for the Fair to the encouragement of greatly improved exhibits, in particular of textiles, pottery and man-made fibre materials.

No, Sir. I think that this money could be better spent on showing British goods in trade fairs abroad.

Will not the President of the Board of Trade reconsider that reply? Does he not agree that our export industries have made a great contribution towards the solution of our economic difficulties? If so, do they not deserve some encouragement, especially the pottery and man-made fibre industries?

I certainly agree, but it is their view also that, with the limited resources, it is better to exhibit abroad rather than here.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is now in a position to make a statement concerning general protection against repossession afforded to hirers for goods in excess of £300 in value, particularly where the hirer becomes unemployed or is working short time.

As my hon. Friend told the hon. Lady on 19th February, I have no evidence that unwarranted repossessions are taking place, and I do not consider that any change in the scope of the hire-purchase Acts is necessary.

Does not the President agree that it is quite ridiculous that hirers of goods of a value up to £300 are protected but that those where the value is over that figure are not? is he aware that I myself have had two cases where people hiring in excess of £300 have been threatened with repossession, and is he prepared to look into the matter again without a whole host of examples?

The hirer is protected by these Acts, and traders in general do not seek repossession unless there is good reason for it. We have not had complaints which would justify new legislation.

But the President is not answering my Question. Am I not correct in saying that the hirer is not protected where the cash value of the goods is above £300?

Yes, that is quite true, but unless there is a real case, no one wants to bring forward new legislation.

Well, I have given the right hon. Gentleman two cases.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will amend the Hire-Purchase and Credit Sale Agreements (Control) Order, 1956, to permit extension of the maximum period for the payment of instalments in cases of hardship.

No, Sir. But, as my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth, South (Sir J. Lucas) was informed on 29th January, it is not a contravention of the Order for an owner to accept whatever payments a hirer can afford to make, so long as there is no variation of the original hire-purchase agreement.

That is exactly what I have put down. Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that if a man falls upon hard times and asks for longer to pay his contributions, the firm is not legally allowed to extend the period beyond the original agreement? What are they to do in a case like that? Does the Minister not know that the firms themselves have written to me, and also to him, asking for this change?

I think the hon. Lady is wrong. It is illegal to vary the agreement by extending the period of repayment beyond a permitted maximum, but if the purchaser does not make the payments, that is not a breach of the Order.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will refer the activities of the newsprint producers in this country to the Monopolies Commission.

In considering future references to the Commission, I will take into account any information that my hon. and gallant Friend may wish to provide.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that these industries affect every citizen in Britain, and that it would be as well, perhaps, to look into their affairs?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the large increase in the numbers of unemployed during the last months in the Lowestoft area; and whether he will take steps to encourage new industries, especially in the field of light manufacturing, to establish themselves there and in other small towns in north-east Suffolk where there are adequate facilities.

I am aware of the recent increase of unemployment in the Lowestoft area. The Board of Trade will continue to bring Lowestoft and neighbouring towns which are in need of new industry to the attention of suitable firms.

Is the President aware that two contributory causes of redundancy and unemployment in that area are, first, the shortage of steel for the ship-repairing and shipbuilding yards and, secondly, the importation of Portuguese processed timber?

I was not aware of those two contributory causes, but I will look into them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will publish a list of goods manufactured in this country which are of strategic defence importance and the manufacture of which he is accordingly prepared to sustain by sufficient tariff protection in any European Common Market arrangement so that this country is not dependent upon a foreign country for such goods in time of war.

No, Sir.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if the protection of the tariff is removed some goods might cease to be manufactured here, that some of them are vitally important in an emergency from a strategic defence point of view, and that some of us may be hesitant about giving our blessing to the Common Market if we are not assured that those defence and strategic considerations are taken into consideration?

I think that the Free Trade Area should strengthen most of the industries which are commonly regarded as strategic, but I can assure my hon. Friend that if there prove to be exceptional cases we shall have to consider them for special treatment on their merits at the time.

Would my right hon. Friend look into the case of the cable makers?

Yes, but it will be a long time before any trouble arises there.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, before he enters into negotiations with other European countries for the purposes of a European Common Market upon definitions of the country of manufacture of any particular goods, he will publish the results of his present questionnaires to industries concerning the proportion of work done to imported goods in preparation for sale.

No, Sir. The document to which my hon. Friend refers was sent to a number of trade associations on a confidential basis, and it would not be desirable to publish the replies.

Will my right hon. Friend appreciate that it is a little difficult to consider the advisability of a Common Market on broad principles, and that many of us want to consider how it affects each industry? Is it not an important consideration to know in what country goods are manufactured? If I may give as an example a shirt cut out in Japan, made up in Hong Kong, the buttons being sewn on in Western Germany, who has manufactured the goods?

Those are very important considerations, and we shall look into them. But it would not help our negotiating position to reveal all this information in advance.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many Government financed factories in the North-East Development Area have been sold; what was the original capital cost of these factories; and how much has been received as a result of the sales.

Two, Sir. It is not the general practice to disclose details of sales, but I can say that no loss to the Exchequer was involved.

Can the President say whether this sale of factories in Development Areas represents a departure in policy, and is it to be widely extended or strictly confined to individual sites?

I do not think it is a departure in policy. It seems to me to be a rather sensible thing to do, because if a manufacturer buys his factory, the position of the industry in the neighbourhood is likely to be stabilised.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this will be allowed generally, or will it be considered by his Department only in special circumstances?

I should certainly want to look at each case very carefully on its merits.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will relax the restrictions on the building of extensions to Government-owned factories in Development Areas with particular reference to factories on the North Tees Estate, Stockton-on-Tees.

No, Sir; it is still necessary to exercise the strictest economy in Government expenditure, and the policy in respect of the building of factories and extensions in the Development Areas remains as explained by my right hon. and learned Friend in answer to a Question by the right hon. Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson), on 5th June, 1956.

Is it not somewhat unfair that private factories in Development Areas can go ahead with extensions, whereas firms in the trading estates are debarred from doing so? Is the President not aware that this is causing considerable disquiet, which may result in certain factories leaving the Development Areas in the near future?

Firms in the development estates are not debarred from doing so, if they will do it themselves. As a matter of fact, there are two applications for extensions from tenants on the North Tees Estate, and one of these firms is considering building for itself.

But surely, even in their economy campaigns, the Government are capable of distinguishing between capital development and current expenditure?

Yes.

Might I ask the President how he squares his first reply with the fact that large Government building costing millions of pounds is now being undertaken in Manchester, for which there is no necessity at all?

I should have to see when these Government buildings in Manchester were started and when authorised.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the unbalanced nature of Anglo-Spanish trade; and what action he proposes to remedy this.

I am aware that Spanish imports from this country fall short of our imports from Spain. But Spain makes substantial payments to other countries in the sterling area, and I see no reason to vary our present policy of seeking to promote trade with Spain in both directions.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that that is a very complacent attitude, and that the facts are that the Spanish Government have been playing ducks and drakes with us for many years, with all the ducks on our side and the drakes on theirs?

If I understand the hon. Gentleman aright, I think the answer to him is that over the last five years Spanish imports from this country have proportionately increased more than our sales to Spain.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the British horticulturist is far more interested in the tomato trade than in ducks and drakes, and will he make quite certain that the Board of Trade keeps a careful watch on the position so that the home producer of tomatoes is not undermined by a flood of imports from Alicante?

Would the right hon. Gentleman say what he meant when he said just now that Spanish imports have increased more than our sales to Spain?

I apologise to the House. What I meant, of course, was that the Spaniards have been buying more from us in total over the last five years than we have from them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will take the necessary action to amend the Monopolies Act, 1948, so as to enable him to take action to prevent the continuance of the type of restrictive practices described in the Monopolies Commission's Report on the radio valve and electronic tube industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what further proceedings he proposes to take in relation to the Report of the Monopolies Commission on cathode ray tubes and electronic valves.

In so far as the type of practices described in the Report are registrable under the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956, they are subject to the procedures laid down in that Act. In the case of other types of practice, the Monopolies Act, 1948, already allows the Monopolies Commission to be asked to report on the effect of such practices on the public interest, and action under Section 10 of that Act may follow a Report of this kind. No amendment of the Monopolies Act, 1948, is therefore needed. I see no occasion to take and further action in regard to the Report.

Is the Minister aware that his right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State said that there was the necessity to amend the Act? While we are now pleased to hear that that is not the case, may I ask him whether he proposes to take some definite action to stop this blatant attempt to push up the cost of these tubes, and to help us to reduce the cost of living? Here is one example where the Minister can take action.

The hon. Gentleman is mistaken. My right hon. and learned Friend did not say that. If there are objectionable practices which are registrable, no doubt someone will see that that is done.

Does not the Minister's answer justify everything which was said on this side of the House during the passage of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act? Is it not now clear that the process of taking any action based upon the Reports which are now coming forward is going to be so slow as to destroy the whole purpose of the Act?

I think the hon. Gentleman will find that the industries concerned take action themselves.

Whatever the Minister of State may have said, are the Government really going to take no action on this Report at all; and if not, will the President tell us why?

Because it appears that the recommendations have already been attended to.

Will the Minister please get in touch with the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and invoke his services in order to make quite clear to the public the degree of profiteering which is being endured in these respects, and will he further realise that it is his responsibility to protect the public and, therefore, if profiteering continues the only thing to do is to make those services national industries?

I do not agree that profiteering is continuing here.

Will the President tell us which recommendations he mentioned are being attended to?

That is another question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that there is a growing practice by which old cathode ray tubes for television sets are being reconditioned and resold; and whether he will introduce legislation to ensure that adequate guarantees of serviceability are issued in such cases.

The facts are as stated, but there is no case for legislation. It is for the purchaser of reconditioned tubes to insist upon assurance of their serviceability.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that the 14-in. tube is being reconditioned and sold at £8? Does this not justify the widespread dissatisfaction concerning the reductions that were introduced for the new tubes last September and prove that the reduction of £2 is still quite insufficient? Will not the Minister look at this matter again and see what he can do to guarantee to these people that the tubes they buy will be serviceable for a stated period of months or years?

The best thing that these people can do is to deal with a merchant whom they can trust. [Interruption.] That is the only way in which the customer can protect himself.

Will the Minister consider whether the matter cannot be referred to the British Standards Institution for a specification to be drawn which would give the people a guarantee of first-class quality in tubes? If a mark were adopted which people could trust, they could buy the tube from any dealer provided that it carried the mark.

I am not sure that any such mark would be of any use in the case of a reconditioned tube, but I will consider it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade details of the types of goods involved in the £2,400,000 imports and £1,500,000 exports between East Germany and this country during last year; and to what extent he proposes to extend this trade and balance the account between imports and exports.

I will, with permission, circulate the Answer to the first part of the Question in the OFFICIAL REPORT. As regards the latter part, imports into East Germany are strictly controlled by the Communist authorities, and I doubt whether there is scope materially to extend our trade there.

That reply is a little more encouraging than the one we had last week. Can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that it is not the policy of the Government to use political objections to prevent trade with any of these countries and that, provided normal commercial terms are agreed to, he will extend trade with any country—of course, bearing in mind strategic considerations?

Subject to the last words of the hon. Member's question, Yes.

Is the President aware that one reason why there is a restriction upon the entry of goods from this country into Eastern Germany is that ours is one of the few countries which has no financial agreement with the

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the high rate of profit extracted by the trade rings controlling the selling price of sparking plugs and anti-freeze; and if he will refer these trades to the Monopolies Commission.

I am aware of what is alleged about the prices of these articles. Sparking plugs will be included in the reference to the Monopolies Commission on certain electrical equipment for motor vehicles announced by my predecessor on 23rd November. Anti-freeze will be borne in mind when considering future references to the Commission.

Is the Minister aware that his Answer is thoroughly unsatisfactory? May I take it for granted that he is aware that the profit that the retailer has to ask on anti-freeze is over 100 per cent. and on sparking plugs just under 100 per cent., and that at least one retailer to my knowledge has been served with legal notice and is in danger of going to gaol because he thinks that 50 per cent. profit is adequate?

That is exactly the kind of question which will now be investigated.

As the hon. Member knows, we do not have official relations with Eastern Germany and, therefore, we cannot make any inter-governmental arrangements.

rose—

On a point of order. The Minister has said that this is the kind of question that will be investigated, but I have got this information and he has every means of getting it. When, there-fore, can the public have protection?

That is not a point of order.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will propose an industry and trade exhibition in the United Kingdom for Commonwealth, Colonial, and Trusteeship territories to focus attention on the mutual benefits of complementary trading agreements with these territories.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer which I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Arundel and Shoreham (Captain Kerby) on 18th February.

I have read that Answer. Will the right hon. Gentleman show a little more enterprise and imagination in these matters? Is he aware that the Iron Curtain countries are holding exhibitions of this character and that the Japanese Government have a large floating exhibition which is travelling the seas? Surely, we should be doing something to extend trade with the Commonwealth and the Colonies and utilise their enormous potentials for our sterling trade.

I am certainly well aware of what the hon. Member has said, but he will also be aware that there is a limit to the number of exhibitions we can put on in any one year, limited not only by Government finance but by what the trades concerned can do. We take advice on this matter from traders, and they think that the present policy in regard to exhibitions gives the best results from our limited resources.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement about the negotiations for a new trade agreement with Australia.

I am glad to state that the new Agreement based on the Heads of Agreement announced last November was signed in Canberra today. Copies are available in the Vote Office.

In thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is satisfied that British exports will continue to receive worthwhile margins of preference in Australia?

Yes, Sir. The British preference will be from 7½ per cent. to 10 per cent. over a very wide range of goods.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider paying post-war credits to persons suffering from some incurable disease and receiving permanent sick pay and who can produce a medical certificate to certify that they will be unable to work again, bearing in mind that many of these people are having to augment their sick pay with National Assistance, whilst substantial sums of money are standing in their name.

I appreciate the sympathy the hon. Member has for these people, but I cannot anticipate my Budget statement.

I hope that the Chancellor will be sympathetic towards these proposals. No doubt many hon. Members could quote cases, but I will quote just one. Because of rheumatoid arthritis, a man aged 60 has been unable to work for the past ten years and will never work again. He has £84 in postwar credits. He and his wife are living on £4 6s. a week sick pay and National Assistance. Is it fair that people who will never work again should suffer while they have large sums as post-war credits? Surely, something can be done for these people.

Will my right hon. Friend give this matter further consideration, particularly for those people who are drawing National Assistance, or those who are too proud to draw it, and who have post-war credits? Will he give the matter his favourable consideration for his Budget statement?

Of course, I have listened to the points which have been put from both sides of the House, but hon. Members will understand that this is clearly a budgetary matter and one on which I could not possibly make a statement today.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that the form issued to applicants for the payment of post-war credits requires information concerning the present employment of the applicant; and if he will state the reason for this requirement.

Yes, Sir. This information enables the Inland Revenue to trace the claimant's Income Tax records for the post-war credit years in order to confirm the amount due to him.

Is the Chancellor aware that to do that it is not necessary to have the address of the applicant's present employer if the applicant has undertaken employment since retiring? Is he aware that a great many of these retired persons would be unable to secure employment if they gave their true ages, because they are retired, and that this provision makes it impossible for them to apply for their post-war credits without revealing to their employer their retirement age in many cases? Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether or not this particular section could be deleted from the form?

I have made some inquiries about this question because I queried the relevance of this requirement. I understand that the employer is not informed and that the information is solely for the purpose of tracing old Income Tax papers. If the hon. Lady would like to see me, I think that I could satisfy her that this is a necessary link in the repayment of the credits.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in view of the fact that the subsistence allowance payable to Ministers and Members of Parliament whilst away on duty is limited to that paid to civil servants of the rank of assistant secretary and above, he will make provision for compensation for death and injury whilst travelling on duty to be paid to Ministers and Members of Parliament on the same scale as that payable to civil servants.

I am considering this matter.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer his estimate, to a recent convenient date, of the volume of premiums upon insurance-securing pensions which will rank for Income Tax and Surtax relief by virtue of the Finance Act, 1956.

The information at present available is insufficient to form a basis for such an estimate.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement about the negotiations for a loan from the Export-Import Bank of the United States of America.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the negotiations for a 500 million dollar loan from the Export-Import Bank have now been concluded.

The formal Agreement with the Export-Import Bank of Washington establishing a 500 million dollar line of credit in favour of the United Kingdom was signed in Washington yesterday, 25th February. The text of the Agreement will be published as a Command Paper as soon as possible. The Agreement enables us to recoup at any time up to 28th February, 1958, a substantial part of our dollar expenditure on goods and services from the beginning of this year, and the gold and dollar reserves are thus effectively reinforced to this extent. Whether, and if so when, to draw on the credit will be a matter of judgment to be decided in the light of circumstances.

Since it has taken nearly three months to negotiate this loan, despite the very full security that Her Majesty's Government have offered, will the right hon. Gentleman say what difficulties have been encountered in the negotiations? While, of course, we shall want to study the Command Paper before commenting on it, will the Chancellor say what rate of interest applies to this loan?

The rate of interest is 4½ per cent. on the money as drawn, that is to say, we are not paying any interest on the money until we actually draw it. I do not think that any unusual difficulties have arisen in this case, and if there were any I would not wish to go over them. We are not pressed for this loan. There is no immediate need for it. The help that it gives is to make a substantial reinforcement to the reserve, and I am very happy that this has taken place.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the fact that new proposals for dealing with problems arising from National Insurance benefits are under consideration by the Minister of Pensions and National Insurance, he will give an assurance that he also will examine ways of assisting those living on small fixed incomes, whether by way of special taxation relief or by freeing all benefits under Government pensions Acts from tax at an age to be agreed.

I am afraid I cannot add to the reply given on 31st January to a Question by my hon. Friend about tax reliefs for persons living on small fixed incomes.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the Prime Minister, in his broadcast to the nation, referred to people who were living on small fixed incomes? Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that I am looking forward to his doing something to meet the pledge that the Prime Minister gave on that very auspicious occasion?

I will certainly bear in mind what the Prime Minister said, as I will, of course, bear in mind the hon. Lady's representations.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that he can give immediate and practical help to a group, with whom all of us profess to be sympathetic, if he will exempt from Income Tax in his new Budget small-pension incomes at a certain age and a certain amount?

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the hon. Lady the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) has asked for assurances time and again and that his predecessor, in January and on other dates, simply led her up the garden? He always declared that his intentions were honourable and has constantly failed to make a definite proposal.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I would much prefer to stand by his honour than by the honour of hon. Members opposite?

rose—

Order. This all seems very wide of the Question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment has been made of the rise in the cost of living resulting from the Rent Bill; and what proposals are under consideration for meeting it from Treasury sources for people whose incomes have been fixed on the basis of rent control.

As my right hon. Friend the present Minister of Defence told the House during the Second Reading debate on the Rent Bill, the increases in the cost of living resulting from the Bill may eventually amount to two points. As regards the second part of the Question, no such proposals are under consideration.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that it has been said in support of the Rent Bill that it is not fair to allow the landlords to subsidise other members of the community and that it was asked yesterday whether those on National Assistance would receive money in respect of the increased rents which they would have to pay when rents are increased under the Bill? Am I to understand that this matter has not yet had the consideration of my right hon. Friend?

Still up the garden path.

This is an extremely relevant argument, but one which is much more appropriate to discussion on the Rent Bill than on this Question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the concern arising from the recent rise in the cost-of-living index to its highest level yet, what action the Government propose to take to deal with this situation.

I do not think that the recent small increase in the index requires any change in the general anti-inflationary policies of the Government.

But does not the Chancellor appreciate that the cost of living is at its highest point ever, largely due to Government action, with heavy increases in rents and rates to follow? Will he answer the Question: what action does he or do the Government propose to take, or will he tell the people bluntly that they do not intend to control, or try to control, the cost of living?

As a matter of fact, the cost of living has remained remarkably stable since my right hon. Friend announced his policy of maintaining prices at a plateau.

Will the right hon. Gentleman do something to remove the feeling in many parts of the country that the Government's only policy for dealing with this problem is by maintaining a very high degree of unemployed capacity in British industry which is the position today, and which may lead, of course, to unemployed resources? Secondly, instead of his preoccupation with the cost-of-living index, would the right hon. Gentleman personally look at some budgets which were presented in London yesterday in the course of certain wage arbitration hearings? Will he look at the actual budgets of how people are living in this country, rather than spend all his time talking about the cost-of-living index?

I did not initiate the talk about the cost-of-living index. It is referred to in the Question. Amongst all the factors that a Chancellor of the Exchequer ought to be paying attention to, one must include the balance of payments position.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what consideration he is now giving to altering the band of tax reliefs introduced in the 1955–56 Budget in such a way as to provide a means of helping those who cannot add to their annual income while at the same time applying the ceiling recommended by the Royal Commission on Taxation.

I have noted my hon. Friend's views.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that he and his predecessors have always expressed the view that it is very difficult to help people on small fixed incomes? Is he not aware that I am giving him a really brilliant suggestion? If so, will he pay some attention to it?

I am always ready to consider by hon. Friend's suggestions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is now his policy for the future level of the Bank Rate.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on 7th February to the right hon. Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson).

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that reply would have been equally appropriate if he had put the Bank Rate up or if he had kept it where it was? In particular, could he tell us whether last week's cuts in the social services were, in the Government's view, a corollary of the cut in the Bank Rate? If so, on the basis of the Government's policy, how many further cuts must we have before the Bank Rate goes back to the normal level?

I do not think that the two are relevant to each other, but the point made by the hon. Member that it was possible to refer the reply to a rise or a fall was the great merit of that reply.

Will my right hon. Friend say that it is the Government's objective to cut down the Bank Rate as soon as possible and that they do not like dear money for its own sake? If the bill rate continues to fall, will the Bank Rate follow?

I do not think that it would be at all helpful if I started making prophecies about the movements of the Bank Rate.

Since the right hon. Gentleman's answer to me, to which he has referred, conveyed no information, and as, since then, there has been a statement by the Governor of the Bank of England, does he not accept our argument from this side of the House last year, when we suggested to him that it is still possible to run an effective monetary policy without a Bank Rate of 5½ per cent., in view of its effect on Government out-payment and overseas balances and so on? Will the right hon. Gentleman be a little more specific in his answer to his hon. Friend the Member for Louth (Mr. Osborne)? Will he say whether it is the policy of the Bank of England, under Government direction, to adopt the new Canadian system of following the Bank Rate rather than influencing it?

There is no fixed rate of Bank Rate, whether above or below 5½ per cent., which is essential to monetary policy. It depends on the circumstances of the moment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what sum of money has been received by the Treasury from the Purchase Tax on wool textiles during twelve months up to the latest convenient date.

Separate figures for the tax on wool textiles as a class are not available.

Is the Chancellor aware that there is no Purchase Tax on textiles made of cotton or synthetic fibres and that the imposition of this tax on textiles made of wool is very much resented? Will he not forgo this comparatively small amount of revenue in order to remove an unjust discrimination against wool textiles, allow fair competition, and put an end to a serious grievance?

This Purchase Tax was levied in this way because at the time, when there was a very substantial reduction in Purchase Tax on textiles, it became evident that from an administrative point of view it would be difficult to have a dual tax, which is normally a feature of textile Purchase Tax—namely, a higher rate on piece goods and a lower rate on manufactured goods—because of the difficulty of collection. It was therefore decided at the time—and the point was argued very widely—that the 10 per cent. tax was the right one.

Does the right hon. Gentleman regard this tax as a revenue tax or a penal tax?

I certainly would not regard it as a penal tax.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the annual revenue which would he derived from an import duty of 10 per cent. on all imported meat, other than imports from Commonwealh countries.

About £4 million a year. My hon. Friend will be aware that some of these goods are already liable to duty at varying rates.

In view of the fact that the 10 per cent. duty on bacon brings in a revenue of approximately £8 million and does not increase the price of bacon, does not my right hon. Friend think it would be advisable to put a tax on imported meat and so save the taxpayer some of the cost of the deficiency payments to home producers?

Questions of tariffs in particular cases are for the President of the Board of Trade.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he thinks that the suggestion of his hon. Friend is one more effort to reduce the cost of living?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what amounts have been received so far during the current financial year from Entertainments Duty on cinemas, theatres and music halls, football matches, horse racing, dog racing and speedway racing, respectively; and how this compares with the corresponding period in the financial year 1955–56.

I will, with permission, circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what amounts have been received so far during the current financial year from duty on totalisators on dog racecourses, from bookmakers' licence duty and from duty on football pools; and how this compares with the corresponding period in the financial year 1955–56.

I will, with permission, circulate the reply in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if he would tax bookmakers in the same way as they are taxed in Ireland and would divide the proceeds with the sport on which the bets are made, he would go down to history as the benefactor both of sport and the general taxpayer? Will he give that his consideration when he prepares his Budget?

These seem to me to be budgetary matters.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the approximate rates of Income Tax and company tax which would produce the same yields in real terms as now if the gross national product were, also in real terms, 5 per cent., 10 per cent. and 20 per cent., respectively, greater than in 1955.

They would be lower, but how much lower depends on so many and so various assumptions about the composition of the gross national product as to be incalculable.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that if a cinema proprietor increases his 1s. admission to 1s. 3d., the Revenue collects 2d, of the increase, the Eady levy gets extra and the proprietor and if he will consider remedying this anomaly in order to secure a fairer share to the cinema industry.

I am aware of this matter and I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to my hon. Friend the Member for Cheadle (Mr. Shepherd) on 31st January.

The right hon. Gentleman does not deal with the last part of my Question, where I asked him if he will not agree that the principle of fair shares might be employed in this regard, and does he not think it is unfair that the cinema proprietor should collect the odium of having to increase prices while the Chancellor collects the money?

All this was part of the review of Entertainments Duty which my right hon. Friend the present Prime Minister undertook to investigate, and it is included in it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the decision by the six Messina Powers to include their overseas territories in their proposed common market whether Her Majesty's Government now intend that British overseas territories should be included in the proposed wider area of partially free trade.

The terms of the agreement reached by the Six Powers have only just become available. It is too early for me to assess the significance of this particular aspect of the agreement, about which the Governments of the Colonies will of course need to be consulted.

Would my right hon. Friend give an assurance that he will take the necessary steps to ensure that produce from the British Empire will not be completely undermined in its market by an enormous preference being given to the products of, say, the French Union?

What arrangements countries in Europe may come to between themselves and their colonies are not entirely within the control of the British Government. At the same time I can give this assurance, that we do not regard these matters as things which can be settled simply in London, or even in Europe. They are matters for consultation with the Colonies concerned, and that we would propose to undertake.

May I ask the Chancellor if he does not appreciate that the decision to include the French and other overseas territories raises serious issues for the Commonwealth countries, and whether he would not take the earliest opportunity to make a statement on this important matter?

Before I made any statement, I think I would like to investigate the facts of the position rather further, and also to undertake certain consultations with the Colonies who, after all, are the people likely to be affected. That would be the next stage in these discussions.

Yes, but is it not a fact that last October the right hon. Gentleman, in answer to Press queries, said that a very serious position would arise, or very different considerations would apply, if the colonies of West European Powers were brought into the scheme? In view of that, and in view of the widespread anxieties about some of the things that have happened, both in his own negotiations and in the Messina negotiations, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the sooner we can have a full statement, and a debate in this House, before further action is taken, the better for all concerned?

The question of a debate is not for me. What I think I have always said is that what arrangements the countries of continental Europe reach amongst themselves is, after all, their affair. We cannot prevent them coming to arrangements. This arrangement would appear to contravene the international obligations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, and it would be necessary to put it before that body in any event. There will, therefore, at that time at any rate, be a full opportunity for the views of other countries to be brought to bear upon it. For our part, however, our next course, having investigated the arrangements in detail, would be to discuss it with the Colonies affected.

asked the Economic Secretary to the Treasury whether any agreement has yet been reached with the Czechoslovak Government for the resumption of payments due by that Government under the Anglo-Czechoslovak Compensation Agreement of 1949.

Yes, Sir. An agreement for the resumption of these payments was concluded between the two Governments on 22nd October, 1956. The relevant exchange of notes has been published as a White Paper (Cmnd. 56).

Would the Minister say what is the amount outstanding and when payments will be resumed?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is referring to private compensation payments. I hope that some payments will be resumed before the middle of this year.

asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury why copies of the Criminal Lunatics Act. 1884, are not available at the Stationery Office.

The Criminal Lunatics Act, 1884, is out of print and the demand for copies is too small to justify the expense of reprinting. Occasional requests for a copy are met by the offer to supply a photographic reproduction.

May I, none the less, draw my hon. Friend's attention to the fact that this Act is one that affects the liberty of the individual? Will he not make it more readily available than it is? Is he not aware that I was unable to obtain a copy myself on recent inquiry and received no offer of a photostat copy?

I will certainly arrange for my hon. Friend or anyone else applying for a copy to obtain a photographic reproduction upon payment.

On a point of order. Did we understand the hon. Gentleman to say at the end of his reply that he would supply a copy on payment?

Of course. Copies of Acts of Parliament are sold by Her Majesty's Stationery Office.

Sir, this matter was raised a little while ago and the hon. Gentleman is obviously unaware of it. Was it not said by you, Sir, or by a Minister, that Acts of Parliament would be made available to hon. Members? We ought not to have to pay in order to carry out our legislative duties in the Chamber.

The right hon. Gentleman clearly did not listen to my reply. I said "or to anyone else upon payment".

Order, order. If I understood the exchanges aright, I think that by "anyone else" the Minister meant anyone outside the House. Is that what he meant?

He did not say that.

This is a difficulty from which the Minister could easily extricate us. Does he mean that any hon. Member of this House can have a photostat copy without payment? If so, why did he not say so?

Nothing in my reply affects the rights of hon. Members in this House. I only wanted to make it clear that these copies are on sale to the general public like any other copies of Acts of Parliament.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The hon. Member surely is doing the House a disservice. Does he mean that any hon. Member of this House can have a photostat copy of this Act without payment?

Nothing which I have said in any way affects or is intended to derogate from the present right of hon. Members to obtain copies of Acts of Parliament.

rose—

Order. This is not strictly a matter of order at all. There seems to be some difference on both sides of the House as to what was meant by the previous statement, which I recollect quite well, but that is not a point of order, and I hope that some other opportunity will be taken to clear it up.

I was going to ask whether the hon. Gentleman has lost the facility for saying "yes" since he has been at the Treasury.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he will take the necessary steps to preserve No. 1, Devonshire Terrace, W.1, a house of architectural merit and of outstanding historic interest.

This house is included in the list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest compiled under section 30 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1947. Two months' notice of any proposal to demolish it or seriously to affect its character must therefore be given to the local planning authority, who are required to notify my right hon. Friend. If any such notice is received the association of the house with Charles Dickens will certainly be borne in mind.

Is the hon. Member aware that this house, in which "David Copperfield" was written—one of the greatest novels in the world—is to be demolished in six months' time unless he or the planning authority does something to stop it? Will he give an assurance that he will not give permission for demolition of this house?

I understand that the London County Council, which is the planning authority, has not yet received notice of any intention to demolish it, nor has it granted planning permission, and, therefore, it would be quite improper for my right hon. Friend to express an opinion one way or the other. The consideration in the Question will certainly be borne in mind.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he has yet approved the Essex county plan: and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend hopes to complete his consideration of the plan in the next few weeks. The maps will require revision in the light of his decisions, before the plan can be formally approved.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, which is the most helpful one we have had on this subject. Can he make sure that the town plans are published soon, because a number of progressive towns in my constituency have been completely held up in all their development because this plan has not been passed?

I understand that fourteen out of the eighteen town plans have already been fully considered.