asked the President of the Board of Trade why he differentiates in granting export licences for China between goods embargoed for export to the Soviet blocprior to October, 1954, and since freed, and those goods not embargoed at that time.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given on 9th April by my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of State to the hon. Member for Leyton (Mr. Sorensen).

May I ask the President of the Board of Trade if he will now consider that goods which are no longer on the embargo list of the Soviet Union should be allowed freely to be exported to China, and that the matter is now one of growing urgency? Could we now have his attention in the direction of expanding and not restricting our trade?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that the exact matter he talks about is soon to be discussed with the other nations which have taken part in the agreement.

Is not it a fact that this matter has been discussed very many times with the other nations concerned and that this has now gone on for nearly two years? May I ask whether my right hon. Friend really is satisfied with the present position regarding trade with China, which has become something of a scandal?

As my hon. Friend knows, the Foreign Secretary told the House the other day that we were not willing to wait very much longer to get some changes in the situation.

Is not this now the time to have decision rather than discussion? We cannot go on being told we must wait a little longer—it all adds up to months and months and months.

I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman will agree that we should try to do these things in concert with our allies.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage the figures for trade with the Chinese mainland in 1936, 1946 and 1956 represented of the total trade of the United Kingdom with countries other than members of the Commonwealth.

The figures are 1·8 per cent., 0·9 per cent. and 0·6 per cent. respectively.

In view of those figures, does not my right hon. Friend consider that we ought to think twice before coming to a decision which very evidently will alienate many people in the Far East—and far more than the people in this country realise?

As the President will not answer that Question, may I follow it up by asking whether he is aware that there is here a potential market of 600 million people? Some of us engaged in trade are getting fed up with the restrictions of the Government, which not only discourage any trade with China, but make it almost impossible for trade representatives to get over the boundary.

I did not wish to he discourteous to my hon. Friend. I was not sure to what decision he was referring. In answer to the question asked by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Ipswich (Mr. Stokes), I would say that I have been looking into the potential volume of the Chinese trade. It is a fact that Chinese trade is in balance with us, and as far as I can see, unless China sells less to Russia, or gets a credit from Russia, there is very little chance of any substantial expansion.

The President speaks in a state of vacuum. Is he aware that the Chinese propose to build 19 dams, and that I am very much interested in them? As I can do nothing about it at the present time, will Her Majesty's Government start to make it possible for us to enter into discussions?

:I think the question will come as to how the Chinese will pay for those dams. Perhaps the interested right hon. Gentleman will tell us.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what action he has now taken to negotiate a trade agreement with China; what were the sterling amounts involved; and the types and quantities of goods mentioned in the agreement;

(2) whether his attention has been drawn to the fact that Japanese and West German exports to China increase during 1956 by 140 per cent. and 49 per cent., respectively, as compared with a 35 per cent. increase of United Kingdom exports; and what steps he proposes to take to ensure that British exporters are given every assistance to enter this important market.

:I am aware of the figures which the hon. Member has mentioned. As regards our own trade with China, subject to the strategic control, my Department gives all possible help to exporters. In present circumstances, I see no advantage in attempting to make a trade agreement with China.

As the President of the Board of Trade says that he is aware that all our competitors are increasing their trade, is it not about time that this Government did something? Is he not aware that, in addition to the 19 dams that have been mentioned, the Chinese are building 18 new towns, and have plenty of dollars with which to pay for the goods they want to import? Will he take the opportunity during the Easter Recess to go there and see for himself that the Americans, the Germans and the Russians are all doing enormous trade with China? And will he do something about it?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is misinformed. The Germans, for instance, have no trade agreement, and the Japanese have only an unofficial one. It is no use trying to make a trade agreement when China can buy quite freely all the things that we can now offer China.

Why is it considered strategically more dangerous to trade with China than with Russia?

That is a very different question.

Even if it is true, which is not my information, that United Kingdom-China trade is at present balanced, is it not desirable that it should increase on both sides?

Of course, I should like the trade to increase on both sides, but there are very large numbers of goods which the Chinese can import now, and are importing. For instance, I am told that the export of wool tops from this country to China is to increase this year.

Did not the right hon. Gentleman say in reply to a previous Question that he doubted whether the Chinese could pay for the goods from this country? Can he explain how it is that the Chinese are able to pay the Japanese and the Germans?

Their total trade is in balance today.

Has the President of the Board of Trade thought this out? What does he think would happen if everybody had a favourable balanec of trade or insisted on it? There would not be any trade at all.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what steps he is taking to improve the volume of our export trade to the Philippines;

(2) what steps he is taking to improve our trade with Formosa.

The Board of Trade keeps in touch with trade developments and opportunities in the Philippines and Formosa, and provides a regular service of commercial intelligence in respect of both markets.

As our export trade with the Philippines was £500,000 a year just before the war, £3 million in 1954, and £6 million in 1956, does not my right hon. Friend think that it is high time we did something more to become more popular in the Philippines? For instance, can be tell us why no Philippine journalists are ever asked to this country, no Philippine students are brought here by the British Council, and the Inter-Parliamentary Union has not asked any Philippine Parliamentary people to come here? Does he not really think it is high time that we did something more for that particular area—and for Formosa, because both countries are very interested in trading with us?

My hon. Friend has raised many considerations outside the responsibility of the Board of Trade, but I undertake to look into them all with my right hon. Friends.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what assurance he will give that the canned tuna, to be imported from Japan under the agreement recently concluded, will be free from radio-active contamination, following the hydrogen bomb tests in the Pacific.

I would refer the hon. Lady to the replies given on 2nd April by the Prime Minister to the hon. and learned Member for Aberdeen, North (Mr. Hector Hughes), and on 25th March by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Supply to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler).

In view of the increasing public apprehension about the dangers of radio-active contamination of fish in the Pacific area, will the President make some sort of statement as to what tests are to be carried out on this canned tuna, either in Japan or when it gets to this country?

The hon. Lady may know that actual tests of the quality of fish would be a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health and not for me. Of course, there are, and have been for a long time, very much larger imports of canned Russian salmon, and we have not had any question asked about them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage of imports into Europe from the British Commonwealth is likely, under the existing proposals, to be affected by the inclusion of overseas territories in the Common Market.

Of total Commonwealth exports to the members of the Customs and Economic Union, about 10 per cent. consists of goods which are also produced by their overseas territories and for which these territories will or may gain tariff preference in all countries of the Union. The extent to which this Commonwealth trade might in practice be affected depends on many factors, including the level of the common tariff ultimately introduced.

Can my right hon. Friend tell us whether any of the Commonwealth producers have indicated that they might welcome greater access to European countries than they have hitherto had?

No, I do not think so. Some of the Commonwealth producers, of course, are very anxious that the tariff which the six countries put on shall be as low as possible.

Could my right hon. Friend publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT details regarding the African Commonwealth territories and Colonies that are particularly affected by the Overseas Territories Convention?

I will have to discuss that with the Colonial Secretary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, having regard to the country's economic problems, he will reconsider Her Majesty's Government's policy towards the Organisation for Trade Co-operation, which is designed to give permanent form in the setting of the United Nations organisation to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

No, Sir.

Having regard to the relative decline of our Commonwealth trade and the need to reconcile a European area of preferential trade with Imperial Preference, would not my right hon. Friend agree that it is madness, and contrary to Conservative principles and promises, to accept a permanent straitjacket on our fiscal freedom, already limited by G. A. T. T.? Has not this become an urgent matter, since President Eisenhower has sent a message to Congress asking for authorisation for the United States to join the O. T. C.? If that happens, is it not the case that the United Kingdom ratification becomes effective?

I think that my hon. Friend is mistaken. On the whole, I think that membership of G. A. T. T. is in our interests, and certainly the other Commonwealth countries show no signs of wishing to get out of it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that traders and business organisations raised their prices at the time of the Suez crisis on the ground that the 1s. petrol tax increased their distribution costs; and what action he proposes to take, by the imposition of price control or otherwise, to ensure that all prices are restored to their former level now that the 1s. petrol tax has been abolished.

I am not aware of any widespread increase in the prices of goods as a direct result of the temporary tax on petrol. Action by Her Majesty's Government is not called for.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that he is about the only person who is not aware of it? Will he ask his wife or any housewife? He will be told that, almost immediately the Is. tax was imposed, every type of distributor increased the cost, and every type of article that a housewife buys went up in price. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] Will the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, take some action to reduce prices to the pre-Suez figures, if I give him facts and figures relating to the increases?

I shall be interested in the hon. Member's facts and figures. His remarks are certainly not borne out by the Index of Retail Prices.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many housewives have not found the statement made by the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Lewis) correct?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that India has introduced the metric system; and, in view of the growing tendency of Commonwealth countries to favour this system and the effect on Commonwealth trade, whether he will now give further consideration to the recommendations contained in the Report of the Hodgson Committee.

I am keeping in touch with developments. I cannot add to previous statements that Her Majesty's Government are not prepared to proceed with the recommendation that the imperial system of weights and measures should be abolished in favour of the metric system.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the House has now been waiting for many months for an opportunity to discuss the recommendations in that Report? Surely the House is entitled to have that opportunity, in view of those recommendations.

There are a number of opportunities for a private Member to raise the subject if he wishes.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the recent agreement under which the United States of America has sold wheat to Brazil for payment spread over forty years; and what representations he proposes to make, in conjunction with other contracting parties, against this violation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

I am aware of this Agreement, which provides that most of the proceeds from the sale of this wheat are to be invested in Brazil. It is the sum invested which is to be repaid over forty years. Such an arrangement is not contrary to the provisions of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that, although it is not contrary to the letter of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, it is contrary to its spirit, and that representations should be made to the United States to stop this kind of practice?

I think that the trade is manifestly to the advantage of Brazil, and I should think that our representations would have no effect.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the United Kingdom's share of the world's exports of manufactured goods in 1956; and what was the corresponding figure for 1937 or 1938.

The United Kingdom's share of the world's exports of manufactures was 21·9 per cent. in 1937 and is provisionally estimated at 19·0 per cent. in 1956.

What does my right hon. Friend propose to do to remedy this continual decline in our share of world markets? Does he not think that our whole economic policy with reference to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade needs looking at, with a view to seeing whether this trade cannot be increased instead of being reduced?

What matters, of course, is the balance of payments. I think chat my hon. Friend will also notice that the rest of the world is increasing in population rather faster than we are. Provided that we keep a share which results in a good balance of payments, I think that that is what we are after.

Does the right hon. Gentleman expect this percentage to go on falling?

Of course he does.

I cannot say.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will make a statement on the matter of retirement gratuities to the unestablished staff in the Civil Service; and whether he will make any improvement retrospective at least to the date of the Royal Commission's Report.

I recently received a deputation on this matter from the Staff Side of the Civil Service National Whitley Council. Having considered their representations very carefully, I have told them that I hope before very long to look again at the possibility of improving these gratuities. I can say no more at present.

Does the Chancellor not realise that that is a very unsatisfactory answer? I am sure that he must be aware that the Royal Commission recommended that something should be done for these unestablished staffs in Government service. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a very large number of them and that, in view of the possible changes in Government employment, large numbers of them may become redundant in the next few months? Will he have another look at the matter and at least treat these men, who have given very loyal service to the State for many years, as well as other people have been treated?

I will certainly keep the matter under consideration. In fact, it would require legislation.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer his estimate of the annual yield of the reduced Purchase Tax on pottery; and for what purpose this tax has been retained.

About £2¾ million: like other household goods pottery must continue to make a contribution to the revenue.

Whilst not wishing the Chancellor to commit himself completely at this stage, may I ask whether he is not aware that the incidence of this tax has been wholly bad in its result? Is he aware that it has not stimulated pottery exports and that it has caused unemployment and short-time working to spread? Why do good by halves? Why not go the whole hog and abolish the tax?

There is always an attractive case for abolishing any tax, but some contribution must be made from this source.

Is the right hon. Gentleman taking steps to ensure that the reduction in this tax is passed on to the consumer—the purchaser?

If the housewife does not find it passed on in one shop, I recommend her to try another.

Is the main purpose of the tax to produce revenue or to reduce consumption?

The main purpose of Purchase Tax generally is that it is an important contribution to revenue.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer his estimate of the number of Surtax payers who will benefit in personal tax reliefs from his Budget proposals.

About 335,000.

When the Chancellor chose to give the greatest benefit of his Budget to the smallest and richest section of the community, did he take into account public opinion? Is he not aware that in a Gallup Poll 91 per cent. of all voters chose as first priority the relief of pensioners?

I took into account what I thought was best for the economy.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what financial purposes he recognises ballet as a fine art; and for what financial purposes he does not so recognise it.

The point which I think my hon. Friend has in mind is a legal one, which it is for the courts, not for me, to decide.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will exempt old-age pensioners from the £1 extra duty on the combined television and sound licence.

No, Sir.

Why not? In view of the reliefs which the Chancellor has given, and which he has stated go to 330,000 people, how does he expect these old-age pensioners to pay, if they are single, two weeks of their pension money for a television licence? How does he expect the million old-age pensioners who are on National Assistance to pay this additional tax, making £4 a year to meet the licence for their television sets? Has he no consideration at all for old-age pensioners?

No doubt the hon. Member will have an opportunity in later debates to develop that point, but if someone can pay 56 guineas for a television set, in general they will be able to pay the extra 4½ d. a week towards the licence.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not appreciate that in most cases old-age pensioners have the set given to them by generous relations but they have to meet the cost of the licence themselves?

There would be difficulty in singling out television sets which had been the subject of a gift. This is a matter better dealt with in debate than in question and answer.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the additional £1 extra duty imposed on the combined television and sound licence, he will permit payment of the annual total in half-yearly instalments.

No, Sir. The cost of collection would be much higher and the half-yearly payments would have to be bigger to cover it.

Why did the right hon. Gentleman not think of that before? Does he not appreciate that it is not easy for those in the lower-income groups to find £4 at one go to meet the cost of this licence? Does he not understand the position in which the majority of people live?

I did think of it, and that is why I did not adopt the hon Member's suggestion.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much it would cost to give all registered blind people who are in normal employment a special Income Tax allowance of £100, in accordance with the recommendation of the Royal Commission on Taxation.

It is impossible to give a precise figure as no information is available about the incomes or personal allowances of blind people in employment but the cost would probably be between £500,000 and £1 million.

Is the Chancellor aware that in the evidence submitted to the Royal Commission it was suggested that between 5,000 and 6,000 people were involved? In view of the comparatively small cost, would he not look favourably on this recommendation as giving encouragement to these very courageous people who are trying to hold down normal jobs and are thereby incurring special expenditure?

I agree about the courage shown by many of these people who suffer from disability. But the Royal Commission's Report went rather further than blind people. It covers all disabled and it raises considerable difficulty, which again I think we shall probably be discussing later.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount of tax payable by a married couple with one child on an income of £600 in 1951 and on an equivalent income in 1956.

A married man with one child and an earned income of £600 in 1951 paid tax, at 1951– 52 rates of £54 5s. 0d. or approximately 9 per cent. of income. Assuming that his income increased at the same rate as the Consumer Price Index he would have earned about £710 in 1956, the tax on which would have been £43 2s. 6d. or 6 per cent. of gross income.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the nominal reduction in the incidence of direct taxation is substantially greater than the real reduction, and that it is to some extent misleading when the Financial Secretary to the Treasury takes the nominal income in 1951 and the same nominal income today and judges the incidence of taxation in that way?

The great thing is that the taxes should keep on going down.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many cinemas he estimates will benefit from his proposal to raise the population for the rural area exemption limit from 2,000 to 3,000.

Between 40 and 50.

As this is the only gesture made by the Chancellor towards the small cinemas, does he not think it is rather inadequate, and has he taken into account the possibility of increasing the population density as well as the total number in the area?

I think it is a contribution to include genuinely rural areas, but if we extend it much further we shall get away from rural areas into small urban districts as well, which is not the main purpose of this exemption.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of the gross national product has been taken by the Government in direct taxation in every year since 1951.

The proportion of the gross national product taken in direct taxes fell from 16·4 per cent. in 1951 to 13·9 per cent. in 1956. With permission I will circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT. I expect some further reduction in 1957.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is now in a position to announce the names of the Chairman and members of the Clean Air Council with a view to implementing the provisions of the Clean Air Act, 1956.

The Act provides that the Minister shall be the Chairman of the Clean Air Council. I hope to be able shortly to announce the names of the other members of the Council.

May I ask the Minister whether he will not express the same sense of urgency in connection with the formation of this important Council, particularly when he himself is chairman, and show the same zeal in this case as he has done in connection with the Rent Bill?

A number of invitations have already gone out. The only reason why I do not want to make a further statement today is that I should like to be able to announce the full membership at one time.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if, in view of the large number of unmade roads in the Benfleet urban district and the difficulties of drainage peculiar to that area, he will give sympathetic and early consideration to the authorisation of loan consent in respect of the making up of such roads where deposits have been duly made in accordance with the New Streets Act, 1951, and petitions have been received from the frontagers concerned.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend believes that the Council can be relied on, while the present need for strict economy continues, to put forward only proposals where work is needed urgently; and accordingly he does not anticipate any difficulty.

Do I take it from that reply that the special difficulties of the Benfleet district are recognised by the Ministry, and that in all cases where petitions have been presented by frontagers, deposits paid, and application made in the proper way for loan sanction by the local authority, there will be no delay?

Yes, Sir, the special difficulties of the Benfleet Urban District Council are recognised by my right hon. Friend, and I assure him that applications for loan sanction either have been or are in process of being approved.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what reply he has sent to the letter from the Wood Green Council asking him to consider allowing local authorities to retain temporary houses on open spaces for a further period beyond that specified in the Housing Repairs and Rents Act, 1954.

My right hon. Friend has informed the council that he would be averse to any further extension of the period for which temporary houses are allowed to occupy land taken from open space; and that he has no amending legislation in mind.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary not feel that it is unreasonable that local authorities whose temporary houses are not on public open spaces are being encouraged by the Minister to purchase those houses, to use them for housing old people and in other ways, whilst authorities such as Wood Green are being compelled to dismantle perfectly good temporary houses when there is still an acute housing shortage?

No, Sir; with respect to the hon. Member, the two propositions are rather different. This was a temporary expedient, and we do not want open spaces to be permanently occupied by temporary houses. I think the hon. Lady will agree that the majority of the houses in Wood Green still have about seven or eight years to run.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he has considered the chapter on Cooperative Housing in the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe publication, European Housing Progress and Policies in 1955 ", and whether he will make a statement on the possible increased development of co-operative housing in this country.

Yes, my attention has been drawn to this publication. While the initiative must rest with those wanting to establish co-operative groups, I am prepared to encourage any housing association development of this kind.

Has the Minister noted from the report that co-operative housing in many countries of Western and Northern Europe has increased considerably since the war, that in Norway and Sweden it has doubled, and that this is clearly the result of Government policy in those countries to encourage co-operative housing? Will he take a similar initiative in this country?

I thought that I had given a friendly reply to the original Question. If the hon. Lady will further read that publication, as I have done, she will see it pointed out there that co-operative housing projects have developed more widely in countries which have made less provision for public housing than this country has done.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government whether he has yet approved the Essex Development Plan; and whether he will make a statement.

I have nearly completed my consideration of the plan but, as explained in reply to my hon. Friend on 26th February, the maps will require revision before the plan can be formally approved. Lists of corrections and proposed modifications to most of the town maps have already been given to the county council, whose officers have started the revision; but this is bound to take some time.

Whilst thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, and as he probably remembers that in his last Answer he said that it would be a matter of a few weeks, may I ask him whether he could not expedite it, since the entire future planning of Essex is held up until this plan is approved by himself?

I did not say that my formal approval could be given within a few weeks, but I pointed out in my previous Answer that the maps would require revision in the light of my decisions. I am extremely anxious to get this plan formally approved as soon as practicable, and I am doing all in my power.

I thank my right Eon. Friend.

When this development plan is produced, may we assume that the Minister will have consulted the Board of Trade, so that there will not be reproduced in Essex what has occurred in Surrey, namely, confusion about the granting of industrial development certificates?

This Question refers exclusively to Essex.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government if he is aware of the difficulties being experienced by large cities that are unable to accommodate their increasing populations within their boundaries and where the surrounding areas are willing to assist by taking them in, but are unable financially to provide the houses, roads, and sewers because of the smallness of the grant and heavy interest charges; and what steps are being taken to deal with this problem.

Exchequer grants towards schemes for relieving congestion in the big cities are by no means small. They amount to 50 per cent. of the cost of water and sewerage works, in addition to a subsidy of £24 per house per annum plus in some cases a further £8 at the outset. Several local authorities have in recent months agreed to undertake schemes for this purpose, and I believe that negotiations now proceeding will result in further agreements.

Does the Minister realise the difficulties of the local authorities if they have not the land to develop for housing, and the over-spill population is going outside the city? The area outside is prepared to accommodate them if the Minister will help by making a grant and reducing interest on the loan. Will he do that to help in those cases?

As I have said, the grants are already generous and the receiving authority may get further help from the exporting authority, and also the county council concerned in the receiving district.

May I ask the Minister whether, in addition to the high cost of interest charges referred to in the Question, he has really examined the high cost of land, and is it not a fact that this is one of the biggest obstructions of all?

So far as I am aware, that is certainly not an obstruction to town development.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think there are some places, which would be useful in relieving the problem of the lack of building space in the big towns, that do not at present attract the subsidies he mentioned, and that he might reconsider this matter having regard to that shortage?

If the hon. and learned Gentleman would like to put any specific cases of that kind to me, I will certainly consider them, but I think that the hon. Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Awbery) was raising the general question as to whether further help could be given with town development schemes for overspill, and I pointed out some of the possibilities.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government what stage has been reached in the negotiations by the Caltex Company or Regent Oil Company for the establishment of a small oil refinery at Hook, Warsash, Hampshire, in the light of undertakings given by his predecessors that a public inquiry would be held.

I understand that no application for planning permission has yet been made. If one is made it will be referred to my right hon. Friend and a public inquiry will be held.

As this is a matter of considerable importance locally, can my hon. Friend give an assurance that the scheme will not slip through without proper scrutiny?

Yes. A direction has already been given that any such proposals will be called in and a public inquiry held.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government (1) whether he has fully investigated the question of the Gosforth Council acquiring land from the National Coal Board for housing purposes, then selling the land to private builders and using the housing revenue account to compensate the National Coal Board; and if he will make a statement;

(2) in regard to the land transactions between the Gosforth Council and the National Coal Board, from what source under the terms of the agreement compensation was payable to the Board.

These transactions have been perfectly regular and straightforward. Some years ago the council bought for housing purposes land in which the National Coal Board had extensive leasehold interests. Payment of compensation for those interests is part of the cost of acquisition and is, therefore, a charge on the housing revenue account. Some of the land thus acquired proved to be surplus to the council's requirements and was, with the consent of my predecessor, recently sold to a private builder. The money from the sale would of course be credited to the account, and can therefore be used, with my consent, towards payment of the outstanding liability to the Board. I have given my consent to the application of a first instalment of this money to this purpose.

Has this reluctance of the Gosforth Council to build council houses on the land anything to do with the withdrawal of housing subsidies?

That is a different question. So far as I know, this was an agreed policy.

asked the Minister of Labour, bearing in mind the importance of the stability of Great Britain's economy and export trade as they affect the prospects of full employment, if he will consider recommending the appointment of a Royal Commission to examine and report on all aspects of industrial relations and trade union law and practice, and make recommendations.

My right hon. Friend would not wish to exclude any solution that would help towards a better understanding in industry, but is not convinced that a Royal Commission is the best method of achieving it.

While thanking my hon. Friend for his reply, may I ask him whether he realises that there are many people in this country who will find that Answer exceedingly unsatisfactory and a great disappointment?

In the end, the results which we all desire depend on co-operation and agreement in industry. The Government cannot compel or direct, but we can guide, and we intend to take every opportunity of doing so.

On a point of order. In view of that reply, may I, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, raise the matter on the Adjournment?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will arrange for an experiment to be carried out for the location of herring shoals in the North Sea by means of helicopters.

I am considering, in consultation with the Herring Industry Board, proposals which have been put forward by a private firm for a trial in the summer.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it is absolutely vital that herring should be found in the North Sea this year? Otherwise, the herring industry may pack up altogether. My right hon. Friend must neglect no possible method— by air, on the sea, and, if necessary, under the sea—of finding, them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, after he has tried this out—and we hope that it will be a success—use the same method to locate the missing members of the Scottish Grand Committee?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland what will be the first sign visible to the public that the Forth road bridge is under construction; and when this sign will appear.

I am advised that the first work on the bridge itself will be the construction of the suspension chain anchorages and the piers and, as I said in reply to a supplementary question by the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. Hamilton) on 29th January, I hope that it will begin in the summer of 1958.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this "doubting Thomas" attitude of a prominent supporter of the Government will create some alarm among the public? Is not this a case where some concrete evidence is really necessary?

I am quite certain that my hon. and gallant Friend is no "doubting Thomas," but merely enthusiastic.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that many people throughout Scotland are looking forward to giving the warmest welcome to this sign appearing, and that I was anxious that they should have every opportunity of being present to see it?

asked the Secretary of State for Scotland whether he will introduce legislation to provide grants for shore-based owners of vessels to replace their diesel engines.

I would refer the hon. Lady to the Answer given to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Berwick and East Lothian (Sir W. Anstruther-Gray) on 26th March.

Is the Secretary of State aware that there is still a demand for such provisions, and that it would benefit trawlers, liners and seine net vessels? As the principle of conversion from coal-burning to oil-fired and dieselengined vessels has been accepted, could he not give consideration to this matter again?

As my noble Friend the Joint Under-Secretary explained on a previous occasion, the greatest care was given in our consideration of this matter and I am afraid that I can hold out no hope of any change in the decision at this time.

Does not the Secretary of State realise that this matter has been hanging fire for far too long? He has given evasive answers on other occasions, as did his predecessor. Is it not about time that a comprehensive Bill was introduced for the modernisation of the Scottish fishing fleets?

The hon. and learned Gentleman is wrong. The decision has not been hanging fire. The decision has been made, as I have explained.