asked the President of the Board of Trade why licences for thread - grinding and gear - shaping machines required by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics have been recently refused.

Licences have been refused because the export of these machines to the U.S.S.R. is subject to embargo.

Is not this embargo somewhat ludicrous at the present time in view of the fact that anybody who has visited the Leipzig or Hanover Fairs now knows that machines of very similar quality are being made in the Eastern European countries and are being obtained by the Soviet authorities? That being so, why cannot we now supply these machines from our own industry here?

We think, in conformity with our partners and allies in this matter, that the embargo is effective for the purposes for which it was designed.

Would not the right hon. and learned Gentleman agree that although Her Majesty's Government were wrong when they "went it alone" on Suez, on this issue they might usefully "go it alone" and be right?

I do not accept the implication in the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question or the invitation in the second part.

Is this embargo list, which was made up so long ago, still as valid as it was then? Are there any changes that would make it less valid?

When the hon. Gentleman refers to "so long ago" he no doubt recalls that the strategic controls on trade with the Soviet Union were drastically curtailed in October, 1954. It is on that list that we now proceed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he intends to lift the restrictions on the export to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics of machine tools of the types which Eastern bloc countries are exporting to other markets.

Not before we and our partners in the Paris Consultative Group consider that the strategic reasons for these restrictions have lost their validity.

Are the Government having discussions with those partners, and particularly with the Americans, with a view to getting these restrictions rapidly modified?

There are no discussions taking place relating to the specific point raised in the Question of the hon. Member.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Ministry of Supply factory, Barton Dock Road, Trafford Park, until recently occupied by Platt Brothers, has yet been re-let.

Negotiations are taking place with prospective tenants who are interested in about one-third of the factory. Other applications are being considered.

While thanking my hon. Friend for the effort which he has already made to let this factory space, may I ask whether the modern foundry block is among the portions which are likely to be let, and whether efforts will be made to let the foundry space as early as possible?

We are maintaining our efforts in respect of the factory as a whole, and we are making renewed attempts to find someone to take over the foundry. Our regional controllers have been asked to give all possible help in securing this end.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has set a timetable for the consideration of the applications received for increased import duties on potatoes and tomatoes in the summer months; and whether any changes can be made effective for the current season.

No, Sir. The time this will take depends upon the representations my right hon. Friend receives.

That is a rather disappointing reply, especially in view of the fact, of which I now ask my hon. Friend if he is aware, that a very heavy flood of Canary tomatoes is now coming into this market, making the position for our tomato growers very difficult. Will my right hon. Friend give urgent consideration to this matter?

Yes, but I hope my hon. Friend does not find it disappointing that my reply should take into account the necessity for thoroughness and care in the examination of these applications and for providing a full opportunity to all interested parties to make known their views.

Are Cyprus potatoes going to come in just at the time when the Ayrshire potatoes are on the market, and are the farmers to lose money, as the result of the actions of the Government?

That supplementary question goes a little wider than the Question on the Order Paper, but I will do my best to satisfy the hon. Gentleman's curiosity at an appropriate time.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will cause an investigation to be made into the articles, commodities and services which have risen in price since the Suez Canal crisis, with a view to defining the extent to which these prices have been reduced to their pre-Suez crisis level; and whether he will take the necessary action, by the imposition of price control or other wise, to ensure that all of these prices are reduced to the prices pertaining in October, 1956, where it can be shown that these were increased due to the war in Suez.

No, Sir.

Can the hon. Gentleman give any sensible or logical reason why he will not accept the suggestion made in my Question, or some such suggestion, when everybody, irrespective of political opinion, would agree that if these prices went up because of the Suez crisis they ought to be reduced now that the reason for the increase has gone? Is he aware that, although the price of flour has been reduced by 9s. a sack in the last few weeks the price of bread has gone up again? Will not the hon. Gentleman do something on the basis of the suggestion made in the Question?

The hon. Member has pursued this subject on a number of Parliamentary occasions. I think he would help his case best if he were to produce some facts and figures on which he bases his contention.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Bill to amend the Weights and Measures Acts, which has been, or is being, prepared, will include proposals for adopting the metric system, as recommended by the Hodgson Committee.

I cannot anticipate the contents of the Bill. As regards the adoption of the metric system, I have nothing to add to the Answers I gave to the hon. Member for Brixton (Mr. Lipton) on 16th May.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I heard that unsatisfactory Answer, and that is why I left this Question on the Order Paper? Is he aware that this is a great opportunity, not only to carry out the reform suggested by the Hodgson Committee, but also to place ourselves in line with the European market? Is the hon. Gentleman also aware that quite a lot of trade is still being lost to this country because manufacturers still quote in measurements and weights that are in a form that cannot be understood by their potential customers?

We are aware of that argument, and we are studying it, but we are far from convinced that we are losing any substantial volume of trade by adhering to the Imperial system.

Can we have any idea when the Bill is to be presented to the House? I asked a question about four years ago, when I was told that it would be presented almost immediately.

It will be presented as soon as Parliamentary time permits.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a statement on the reference on chemical fertilisers to the Monopolies Commission.

The Commission is proceeding with its work. My right hon. Friend does no expect to receive its Report for some time.

The Minister of State will appreciate that there is a good deal of public concern about this matter, as a substantial subsidy element is involved. Will he call the attention of the Commission to the question whether we can get an earlier report than he, apparently, expects?

I do not think the instrumentality of myself is necessary to make the Commission, and indeed the public generally, aware of any point raised in the House by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that it is a condition of membership of the National Pharmaceutical Union that applicants in retail, wholesale or manufacturing, shall be members of the Proprietary Articles Trade Association; and if he will ask the Monopolies Commission to make an inquiry on this matter and report to him.

My right hon. Friend is not so aware; but if such a condition does exist, it would not be a matter on which a reference to the Commission could be based.

Surely, this organisation, which is recognised by the Board of Trade and with which the Ministry of Health has dealings, ought not to lay down a condition that applicants should, in the first place, join a price-fixing organisation? Surely that fact ought to be referred to the Monopolies Commission?

No, Sir. If the hon. Gentleman will study Section 3 of the 1948 Act, he will see that this condition, taken by itself, does not constitute a case for reference to the Monopolies Commission. Price-fixing agreements, as I am sure he is aware, are not, in any event, a matter for the Commission, but one for the Restrictive Practices Court.

Is it not a fact that all that happens is that, for convenience, the two subscriptions can be paid together, and that if any member of the Union does not desire to be a member of the Association, that can be arranged?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that although the cost of producing newsprint in this country is only £35 per ton, the equalised price charged to newspapers is approximately £60 per ton; and if, in view of the dominating position of the two largest producers, he will refer the newsprint industry to the Monopolies Commission.

My right hon. Friend is aware of the price charged to newspapers for newsprint; but he is not aware of the cost of production. My right hon. Friend will bear in mind any representations relating to this industry in considering references to the Monopolies Commission. But the hon. Member will have in mind that if there are any common price agreements in this industry, these are not a matter for the Monopolies Commission, but for the Restrictive Practices Court.

Is the Minister aware that of imported newsprint nearly 50 per cent. is imported and used by the big newspaper chains like Rothermere and Northcliffe, which leaves the remaining daily and evening newspapers in the hands of the newsprint companies, and constitutes a monopoly? Is he further aware that the inferior newsprint made from rags is foisted, to the extent of 80 or 90 per cent., on weekly provincial papers? Many newspapers have died, many more are in danger, and, whatever the position is technically, will he not have an inquiry into the price structure and distribution of newsprint?

The hon. Gentleman's question relates to the reference of the newsprint industry to the Monopolies Commission. He will appreciate that the Monopolies Commission acts under statutory powers under the relevant Acts, and we cannot, of course, go outside these statutory formulæ.

Is not the Minister aware that there is a widespread feeling that there are very serious restrictive practices in regard to the newsprint industry? Will he bear in mind that The Times, in a leading article last Saturday, said:

" If the newsprint companies feel that they have as good a case as they claim, they should welcome their operations being referred to the Restrictive Practices Court."

Is not this a matter of public interest, which the Minister ought to take far more seriously than he has done?

As the hon. Gentleman knows so well from his participation in the proceedings when the Bill was before the House, cases are not referred to the Restrictive Practices Court. If there are common price agreements in the industry, they are, of course, liable to registration under the Registration of Restrictive Trading Agreements Order, 1956, and will come before the Court in due course.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the reason for the delay in announcing the date for the coming into full operation of the Copyright Act, 1956.

There has been no avoidable delay. As hon. Members will have realised, when they were debating the Copyright Bill, an interval was necessary between the passing of the Act and its coming into operation in order to consult interested organisations, to prepare certain subordinate legislation and to set up the Performing Right Tribunal.

Arising out of that reply, may I ask my hon. Friend when it is proposed that Her Majesty's Government should adhere to the Universal Copyright Convention, and so afford a measure of copyright protection in the United States of America for which British authors and publishers have been waiting for a very long time?

It is our intention to ratify the Universal Copyright Convention shortly after the coming into operation of the Act.

Can the hon. Gentleman say when the necessary Instruments will be laid before the House?

A number of Instruments will be laid tomorrow.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the need to preserve the freedom of the Press, he will institute an inquiry into the present ownership and policy of the newsprint industry and into other factors which appear to militate against the survival of some newspapers.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that I tabled this Question to the Prime Minister because it raises issues which are beyond the responsibilities of the Board of Trade, including the impact of commercial television upon the advertising revenues of newspapers? Is he aware that this factor, as well as the high prices charged by the four newsprint companies, to which hon. Members have already referred, are generally accepted as being responsible for the difficulties which many papers are facing at the moment? If he cannot refer the matter to the Monopolies Commission, will he consider the possibility of setting up an inquiry into the newsprint industry of the kind for which there was all-party support last Friday?

In considering the question of setting up an inquiry, it is material to consider what is the likely benefit to accrue from such an inquiry. I have dealt with the position in regard to the Monopolies Commission and the Restrictive Practices Court in answer to Question No. 9. In regard to these wider matters of the competition of television and so on, it is difficult to see what help the Government could give to the newspaper industry other than by way of subsidy or restrictions upon its competitors, neither of which courses, I think, would commend itself to the hon. Gentleman.

Would not my right hon. Friend confirm the fact that the Newsprint Supply Company is wholly operated by newspaper proprietors themselves, who in turn operate an equalisation price scheme, and that they include the proprietors of Left-wing newspapers like the Daily Mirror and the Daily Herald?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how the increase in expenditure on the social services by the central government, the National Insurance Fund, and the local authorities between 1951–52 and 1956–57 compares with the rise in retail prices during the same period.

Between 1951–52 and 1956–57 expenditure on the social services increased by 38 per cent., and retail prices by about 23 per cent.

Arising out of that Answer, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he agrees that, despite economic difficulties in the last few years, there has been a very substantial advance in the provision of real social services for the people?

Yes, Sir.

Does not the hon. Gentleman also recognise that a very large part of any increased expenditure is in fact due to rises in prices, and that the real increases in the value of the services are extremely limited?

That does not detract from the fact that there has been a substantial increase in real terms over the period—about 12½ per cent.

The Government, who pledged themselves to reduce Government expenditure, record that there has been an increase in Government expenditure of £1,600 million since 1950–51. Is not the hon. Gentleman's answer an admission that by far the greatest single element in that increase of £1,600 million is the price rise and inflation?

But in that period there has been a substantial fall in the real burden of Government expenditure.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on his discussions with M. Faure, on behalf of the French Government, about proposals for a European Free Trade Area; and, in particular, what conclusions were reached about the entry of goods from French colonial territories into the European Common Market area and the European Free Trade Area, respectively.

My right hon. Friend was glad to welcome M. Faure and had useful discussions on the Common Market and the Free Trade Area.

My right hon. Friend took the opportunity of welcoming the signature of the Treaty of Rome and emphasising the importance which Her Majesty's Government attached to its ratification and to the association in a Free Trade Area of the United Kingdom and other countries of the O.E.E.C. with the European Economic Community. M. Faure for his part emphasised the French Government's support for such association.

There was an exchange of views on a wide range of matters, but it was not the object of the discussions to reach final conclusions on the many complex problems involved.

While it would be wrong to press the right hon. Gentleman on the outcome of these discussions in view of the latest events in Paris, I should like to ask him a question. The very general communiqué issued by the Treasury covered the same points as the right hon. Gentleman has done. Is he aware, however, that apparently inspired statements have appeared in the newspapers suggesting that included in the discussions are subjects relating to the position of French colonial territories in the Free Trade Area and that there was, at least, a provisional agreement that colonial territories should not be included in the Free Trade Area? Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm whether there was such a provisional agreement and will he bear in mind that, if there was, it will be supported from all sides of the House?

As the right hon. Gentleman appreciates, it is not customary to give details of private conversations between Ministers. I cannot add to what I have said.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish as a White Paper all the memoranda submitted by the Board of Inland Revenue to the Royal Commission on the Taxation of Profits and Income on all aspects of the subject of exemption of overseas profits from home taxation.

The Royal Commission decided on grounds of expense, against publication of the written evidence submitted to it but arranged that copies should be deposited with the libraries mentioned in paragraph 12 of its Report. I am arranging for a copy to be placed in the Library of this House.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that since it is generally known that the Board of Inland Revenue produced the most blistering memoranda on the original proposals for these overseas trade corporations, the interest in this matter goes much wider than this House? Will he not, therefore, consider publishing the memoranda as a White Paper so that newspapers and other commentators can inform themselves of the reason for the opposition of the Board of Inland Revenue thereto? Secondly, while we are grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for agreeing to put the document in the Library, because of the widespread interest, may I ask whether he can arrange not only that one copy should be available, but that there will be a number of copies, and that they should be put in the Library almost immediately, so that we can put down appropriate Amendments to the Finance Bill?

I hope that it will be in the Library in a day or two. I will look into the point about how many copies can be made available. As to the first part of the right hon. Gentleman's question, I suggest that he verifies his surmise.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when Purchase Tax was first imposed on the Crayleigh safeguard for gas and electric cookers; and how much has been collected, to date, from this tax.

Articles of this kind have been chargeable with Purchase Tax since October, 1940. The amount of tax collected on them is not separately known.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that this is the first time that a cooker device or any device aimed at reducing accidents in the home has been subject to Purchase Tax? Is he further aware that what he gains on the Purchase Tax swings, he will lose on the hospital roundabouts? Why does he not abolish this tax?

There are a number of accident prevention devices which fall into Purchase Tax groups, and, of course, this item has had the Purchase Tax on it reduced by half in the Budget.

It is not good enough to say that because the Government are misbehaving in respect of one item, they can misbehave in respect of many others too. Will the hon. Gentleman, realising, as I am sure he does, the widespread feeling all over the country about accidents in the home, have another special look at this question, the more so in that the House of Commons cannot, on this year's Finance Bill, move separate Amendments to deal with this point? Will the hon. Gentleman have another look at this matter and give a lot of satisfaction, I am sure, in all parts of the House?

Naturally, I sympathise with the object behind the two questions, but the exemption of accident prevention devices generally is a very complicated and difficult matter.

Does my hon. Friend realise that what I think is that the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the rest of the Treasury Ministers are so taken up with the big financial problems of the day that they really have no time for these most important and small details? Would it not be a good thing if they got a few housewives to get down to telling them what to do?

My right hon. Friend has been able to look at this detail very carefully.

Since, to follow the point made by the hon. Lady the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward), the hon. Gentleman and other Treasury Ministers have made such an awful mess of the big financial and economic problems, could they not at least gain a little credit with the hon. Lady and also more widely by applying their minds to this problem a little more constructively?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will state the reasons for heavy rates of Purchase Tax on domestic space and water heating appliances operated by gas and electricity, based largely on indigenous fuel, namely, coal, whereas similar domestic appliances operated by imported oil fuel are free of Purchase Tax; and, in view of current hazards in oil supply, whether he will rearrange matters to encourage maximum use of indigenous fuel resources.

My right hon. Friend has noted my hon. Friend's suggestion.

To return to the supplementary question asked earlier by the right hon. Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson), may I ask whether my hon. Friend is aware that in the terms of the Finance Bill this year, none of these important issues can be raised in Committee or on the later stages of the Bill? As this is an anomaly which we have had now for several years, and having regard to the hazardous oil supply position in the future, is it reasonable that we should continue to give preference to oil consumption at the expense of indigenous fuels?

Those are points which my right hon. Friend has noted in connection with my hon. Friend's Question.

On a point of order. As I am precluded from raising this question on the Finance Bill, I give notice that I shall seek to raise it on the Adjournment when it will be in order.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Will the hon. Member not be equally out of order in trying to raise on the Adjournment a matter of taxation legislation? In view of that, will the Government again consider this matter and see whether it cannot be raised, in order, on the Finance Bill?

Further to that point of order—

Order. I have not seen what question the hon. Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro) desires to raise. When I see it, I will express an opinion as to whether it is in order.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will pursue his desire to provide a basic travel allowance for the dollar area by discussing the problem with the Canadian and United States Governments now, to see if some mutually satisfactory arrangements can be made.

My right hon. Friend is anxious to provide this allowance as soon as circumstances permit.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer is fairly confident that he will be successful in this so that ordinary people can visit Canada and America, which will be welcomed on both sides of the Atlantic?

I quite agree that it is desirable.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what progress he has made towards the conclusion of a double taxation agreement with Italy.

I hope that such an agreement will shortly be signed and submitted to Parliament for ratification.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when the tenant of the Forestry Commission lodge at Aberangell can expect that his cottage will be repainted and redecorated.

The Forestry Commission has informed my right hon. Friend that it will paint the outside of the cottage this year. The tenant is responsible for internal decoration.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this cottage has been allegedly down for painting for several years? Is he further aware that when the Forestry Commission leases a property, it insists on a five-year painting clause? In these circumstances, how has this cottage gone unpainted for over twenty years?

My hon. Friend is not quite correct in his facts. The cottage was painted in 1943, 1949 and 1951. I am, nevertheless, grateful to my hon. Friend for bringing the point to my attention.

As I live there, I know perfectly well when the cottage was last painted.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the estimated comparative cost of making the principal Forestry Commission Dovey Forest road exit to Aber-angell via the hilly Cwmllecoediog Drive and the flat lower disused tramway road, respectively, taking into account the plans of the local authority to make up the latter in any case.

The estimated cost of the first road is £2,600. Any work which the county council may do on the tramway road would be insufficient to make it fit for forestry traffic. The extra cost of so doing would be at least £1,400 and might involve compulsory purchase of agricultural land. The comparison is not however valid since, if the old tramway road were used, it would still be necessary to improve at least part of the other road and to carry out major works in Aber-angell village.

To anticipate further suggestions, might I again ask the Minister to appreciate that I have some local knowledge of the matter? Will he realise that if he persists in a scheme which means taking logs to the top of the hill only to bring them down again, he will be emulating a certain famous Duke of York?

My right hon. Friend has gone into the matter at great length with my hon. Friend. I would remind my hon. Friend that in March this year a special meeting attended by the County Surveyors of Merioneth and Mont-gomerty, the County Clerk of Merioneth and the Chairman of the Merioneth Highways Committee came to the conclusion that the suggestion that my hon. Friend makes is not a practical one.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food his estimate of the approximate volume of soft wood timber of 12-inch diameter and up wards at breast height now standing in the Forestry Commissions' plantations.

The Forestry Commis-mission estimates the volume at between 40 and 50 million cubic feet Hoppus measure.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware that the price of meat has been increased from 5 to 7½ per cent., and sugar Id. to 2d. more per pound since the Suez crisis; and if he will now take steps to have these increases removed.

While I cannot accept the hon. Lady's figures, any increases which have occurred in food prices have been offset by reductions in the prices of other foods so that the index of retail food prices in March was at about the same level as in October. My right hon. Friend does not consider that any action on his part is required.

Am I to take it that when there was a direct opportunity to reduce the cost of living hon. Gentlemen opposite were content to keep it as it was by allowing increases to offset certain reductions? Would that have pleased the Conservative women's conference yesterday?

Without going into the matter concerning the Conservative women's conference—[HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"]—because it does not arise on the Question—I would tell the hon. Lady that in my view, and in the view of the Government, it is right to leave these matters to private enterprise. One then gets interplay, and competition arises. Many other foodstuffs have come down in price as a direct result of competition during the period referred to.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that he has a responsibility in respect of the surcharge on sugar? When will he announce that the surcharge is to be removed?

The matter of the surcharge is perhaps a little outside the terms of the Question, but I would point out that when the Sugar Act was being dealt with by the House it was amended at the instance of hon. Members opposite to provide that a period of six months ahead should be clearly seen before any alterations were made. The subject is very much in my right hon. Friend's mind, and no doubt before long we may be in a position to make a statement.

I agree that it would be a good thing if all prices went down at the same time instead of there being fluctuations, but will my hon. Friend explain to the Opposition that the Conservative women's conference does not want food controls?

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether, in view of the latest and third decrease of 9s. per sack in the cost of flour, he will take steps now to reduce and control the price of bread.

No, Sir.

Is it not incredible that, after all the decreases in the price of flour, I should be given the "brush-off" when I ask for a reduction in the price of bread? Does not the hon. Gentleman think that instead of the Conservative ladies being taken to the Terrace for tea, they should have been brought up to the Public Gallery to hear the "brush-off" that we are constantly given when we ask for a reduction?

I am sure that the Conservative ladies would have approved of the Answer which I have given the hon. Lady, because I am sure that they believe, as I do, that it is not right to reimpose price control.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that there is some evidence of monopolistic tendencies in the industry, and that for that reason there is a responsibility on the Government to have an inquiry and to reduce prices by order?

Bread is one of the very first items to come before the Restrictive Practices Court. I think it is best to leave the matter there.

If the price of bread is to be controlled, will it involve rationing, as was the case under the Socialist Administration?

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will examine the possibility of using the large amount of skimmed milk, which is being poured daily on a field adjoining the creamery at Builth Wells; and whether he will make a statement.

Because of the record milk production over the last few weeks, the Milk Marketing Board and the manufacturers of milk products have not been able to find a market for all the skimmed milk which has been available.

All the factories have been worked to the absolute limit. New plant has been brought into operation this year. The Board has made a vigorous and successful effort to increase the sales of skimmed milk for stock feeding.

Nevertheless, as in every year since 1950, it has not proved possible to avoid the wastage of some skimmed milk during the short flush season. No one regrets this more than the Milk Marketing Board who, in close collaboration with the manufacturers, are making every effort to avoid waste. Milk production is now falling slightly from its record seasonal peak of over 43 million gallons a week, and it is hoped that all the skimmed milk will be handled without waste by the end of next week.

Will the Minister kindly ensure that all villages and schools around the depot are first provided with fresh milk? Also, will the hon. Gentleman make representations to the Milk Marketing Board and bring pressure upon the owners of the creamery to devise some process for dealing with surplus milk, even if it entails milk being brought for the purpose from other creameries in South Wales?

The hon. Gentleman's first point is a matter for the Milk Marketing Board, and I will ensure that his comments are brought to its attention. With regard to his second point, the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the factory in Builth Wells is a C.W.S. one, and the Milk Marketing Board has for some time been urging the C.W.S. to extend its manufacturing capacity there. I hope that it will be successful.

Can the hon. Gentleman explain why the milk is not used? Why is it not used for feeding pigs? Why is it going to waste?

There has been a very substantial increase in its use for feeding pigs. The problem is an economic one, that of being able to convey it far enough, for the cost of distribution is so high. Nevertheless, as I said, there has been a substantial increase in its use. Some 750,000 gallons a week have been used recently for stock feeding.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will take steps to compel merchants to disclose the charge made for preparing for sale, by mixing and bagging, compound fertilisers.

My right hon. Friend has no power to compel merchants to make such disclosures.

As inquiries show that there is a very wide variation in the rake-off of manufacturers—in some cases it is higher than 50 per cent.—will the hon. Gentleman advise his right hon. Friend to seek these powers?

I am surprised at the figure quoted by the hon. Gentleman. Fifty per cent. seems extremely high. I would remind him, however, that it is very easy for farmers, if the prices seem excessive to them, to buy straight fertiliser. I should have thought that that would be an effective check against any monopolistic tendencies.

As it is not an effective check, will the hon. Gentleman look at the matter again?

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food which were the slaughterhouses referred to in the report of the committee of inquiry into the export of live cattle which failed to satisfy the standards required by the United States Army Veterinary Corps: and in what respects did they fail.

My right hon. Friend is communicating with Lord Balfour of Burleigh, who was the Chairman of the Committee, and will write to the hon. Member as soon as possible. He understands, however, that the requirements of the United States military authorities for slaughterhouse equipment include steam hoses and cool air chambers, which are not normally available in this country.

Does not the hon. Gentleman admit that it is an awful reflection upon conditions in this country if we have to export cattle to be slaughtered for the United States Army? It is disgraceful reflection upon the state of our slaughterhouses. Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that we shall have legislation next Session to deal with this disgrace?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that we are considering new legislation dealing with slaughterhouses, and I hope that it will come before the House next Session. In the meantime, we are producing draft regulations as a guide to people who are proposing to improve their slaughterhouses, and I hope these will be available very shortly.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many veterinary students graduate each year; to what extent the number of qualified veterinary surgeons is increasing; and if he is satisfied that the present veterinary schools are adequate to meet the calls on the profession.

On average over the last five years about 230 new veterinary graduates have been added annually to the statutory register, while the total number on the register has increased by about 130 a year. My right hon. Friend has no reason to think that the existing veterinary schools are unable to provide a reasonable flow of graduates.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food the estimated cost of the subsidy to producers on shell eggs for the first four months of 1957, and the estimated weekly cost compared with the average cost of the subsidy for the equivalent periods in each of the preceding two years; the estimated total subsidy payable for the current year to egg producers; and what remedial action he proposes to take before the next Price Review.

The cost of the subsidy to producers on shell eggs for the first four months of 1957 is estimated at £26·3 million, an average weekly cost of about £1·5 million; the average weekly cost of the subsidy for the corresponding periods of 1955 and 1956 was about £450,000 and £410,000 respectively. The published estimate of the cost of the subsidy on eggs for the current year is £32·7 million, but it is already apparent that this figure is likely to be substantially exceeded. As regards remedial action, I cannot add to the reply which was given by my right hon. Friend on 20th May.

But would not my hon. Friend agree that there are still eight months to the next Price Review, and that the present rate of subsidy—an average of £1½ million a week—would represent an additional expenditure of about £48 million for eggs? Is there to be a Supplementary Estimate or Vote presented to the House? Surely this state of affairs calls for some remedial action at an early date, and not eight months hence.

My hon. Friend may be assured that if there is need for a Supplementary Estimate it will be presented to the House. I am afraid that his figure of £1½ million is not exactly accurate, because the bulk of the subsidy in the last year—and, indeed, for a number of years, I think—has fallen in the first three months of the year. Therefore, the figures need not be so large as my hon. Friend puts them.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary remember that a previous Conservative Minister of Food abolished this subsidy?

It is still £1½ million a week, and that is too much.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what quantities of shell eggs have been exported since 1st January, 1957, to European countries which are signatories of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and what is the total value of such eggs; what element of Government subsidy is inherent in these exports; what discussions with foreign countries are taking place in this matter; and whether he will make a statement.

During the first four months of 1957, about 124,000 boxes of 30 dozen eggs valued at £400,000 were exported to European countries which are signatories of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. The best estimate that can be made of the average rate of subsidy on these eggs is approximately Is. 11d. per dozen. Discussions with the Danish Government took place earlier this week and, as already announced, Her Majesty's Government have decided to take steps to prevent serious damage being caused to the normal Danish export markets as a result of the export of eggs which have benefited from the subsidy on home production.

Does that reply mean that there is to be an estoppel put on the export of eggs by Her Majesty's Government? If it does mean that, surely it will follow that we are to add to the surplus at home and thus to the taxpayers' burden, and further aggravate what I consider to be the appalling figures which my hon. Friend gave in his last reply?

I think that my hon. Friend is a little unduly gloomy about this matter, because in actual fact the exports have been reduced very substantially in recent weeks and are now running at a much lower figure. As regards such arrangements as are to be taken, I would assure him that machinery for implementing the Government's decision is being worked out, and will be announced after further consultation with the Danish Government. I do not think that it would be right for me to comment further while those consultations proceed.

Could the Parliamentary Secretary indicate in what way he is to implement action consequent upon this admission of incredible folly and stupidity, and waste of the taxpayers' money?

Without conceding the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question, I think that it would be wrong for me to comment while these negotiations are going on, A full statement will be made, of course.

As some of us are rather mystified by the complications of this business, would the Parliamentary Secretary convey to his right hon. Friend that it would be a good thing if we had a White Paper—that is, if we have not got one—which would really fully explain the economics of this transaction, including the consequences to Denmark and to countries to which we export? Does he not think that the House should be fully informed about this? It does involve very big amounts for the taxpayers.

While I would, naturally, consider very seriously anything which the right hon. Gentleman suggested, I do not think that a White Paper is called for. These exports are really very marginal. The numbers exported are really quite small in relation to the total output.

Has my hon. Friend's attention been drawn to the reports which are circulating to the effect that British eggs are being exported at a rate of over ½ million boxes a week, and at a cost to the taxpayer of £1½ million a week? Would he not agree that these figures are inaccurate and that, therefore, the reports are very misleading?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. I think that this matter arose in Press reports, which I did see. The figures, of course, are totally wrong. In fact the figure quoted of over ½ million boxes a week is the total output of all our packing stations, nearly all of which goes for home consumption. The same applies to the figure for subsidy of l½ million a week for the export: the total subsidy on exported eggs in the first four months will be, I should say, approximately £400,000.

Now that there have been these further discussions, would the hon. Gentleman agree that these eggs were deliberately used to break the Danish prices in the West European market?

No, I would not agree.

asked the Minister of Labour (1) how many Hungarian refugees have now received sufficient training to make them employable underground;

(2) in which areas he has had difficulty in placing Hungarians for employment in the mines; and for what reasons.

I am informed by the National Coal Board that so far 480 Hungarians have received sufficient training to make them employable underground. The National Coal Board is responsible for their allocation to the mines, and I understand that some branches of the National Union of Mine-workers have objected to Hungarians being placed in particular collieries, mainly in South Yorkshire, the Midlands and South Wales. This is a matter for the Board and the National Union of Mineworkers who are, I understand, actively engaged in dealing with it.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I point out that it is still his responsibility, to some extent, to obtain employment for these men? If the objections lie on the score of personal risk, will he ask the Chairman of the Coal Board to consider whether training could not be designed with a view to allotting what have hitherto been regarded as uneconomic pits to be worked solely by Hungarian miners?

I think that that Question goes beyond my responsibility in this instance. I have a general responsibility, of course, but in this particular case I have not. Indeed, the information which I give to the He use is passed on from the National Coal Board. I can say. however, that the numbers actually employed in the collieries have gone up by 70 or so since I gave a figure about a fortnight ago—207 have actually started. There are difficulties remaining, and I think that the only way to get over them is for the Board and the N.U.M. to get together.

Is the Minister aware that the employment of foreigners in the mines is governed by the 1947 agreement, and that Questions like that asked by the hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Remnant) are making it more difficult for the N.U.M. and the Coal Board to get over these difficulties? Could the Minister tell us how many Hungarians have been employed in the breweries?

Answer.

asked the Minister of Labour how many Hungarian refugees have been placed in industry other than coal mining.

About 11,000 Hungarian refugees have been placed in employment other than coal mining. This total includes refugees who were placed in temporary employment but have since emigrated to Canada, and the actual number now at work is somewhat less.

Does the Minister realise that there are very special difficulties in the way of placing Hungarians in the coal mining industry, as compared with other industries? First, the Hungarians have to go into areas where there is hostel accommodation available but not necessarily vacancies; and, second, they have to train for sixteen weeks before being accepted for work underground. Is he aware that at the present time discussions are taking place, particularly in Yorkshire, with a view to providing Hungarians with special facilities to work together in drift mines?

That may be so. It is a very ingenious supplementary question, but it is not directed to the Question, which relates to all other industries except coal mining.

Is it possible for the Minister to answer the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Mr. Blyton)?

Can my right hon. Friend say whether he has received any opposition from any other industries about the employment of Hungarians, and if he has, can he state which industries they are?

It is true that the difficulties have mainly, indeed almost entirely, come about in coal mining, but there are special reasons there. The trade unions have been extremely helpful throughout, and I am very grateful for their co-operation.

Is it possible for the right hon. Gentleman to answer the question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Mr. Blyton) as to how many Hungarians have gone into the breweries, particularly those associated with the hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Remnant)?

asked the Minister of Labour to state, at the latest convenient date, the number of furniture workers unemployed and the number on short time.

The number of persons last employed in the furniture and upholstery industry registered as wholly unemployed in Great Britain at 15th April was 1,988. The number of operatives on short time at firms in the industry which rendered returns for the week ended 30th March was 3,700 but reports from my regional controllers indicate that there has been some increase since then.

Is the Minister aware that this is the third successive year in which there has been considerable unemployment in the furniture industry, and that currently it is rapidly getting worse, despite the fact that many have left the industry? Will he get in touch with his right hon. Friends the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the President of the Board of Trade to see if they can do something to bring about an improvement?

I think that the unemployment figures which I have given are rather better than comparable figures of a year ago, which is unusual in most trades. Actually, these figures are rather out of date, as my Answer indicated. I will have some more recent figures very soon, and perhaps I can send those to the hon. Gentleman, and consider his supplementary question in the light of them.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he is now in a position to make a further statement on the system of interviewing prisoners eligible for corrective training for the purpose of making reports which may be published in court, with special reference to the danger of defaming third parties who have no.redress.

Not yet, Sir, but I am making progress with this problem, and if the hon. Member would care to put down a Question for answer next Thursday, I hope by then to be in a position to indicate what action I propose to take.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when it is proposed to hand over to the Anglo-Egyptian Aid Society the remaining £70,000 promised by Her Majesty's Government to the Society for its work in aiding British nationals expelled from Egypt.

it has been agreed with the Anglo-Egyptian Society that, in addition to the £30,000 already paid to it, a further sum of £50,000 should be paid to it in respect of the work which it has done, before the establishment of the Anglo-Egyptian Resettlement Board. It is proposed to submit to Parliament a Supplementary Estimate to authorise the payment of this sum of £50,000 to the Society.

Is the Home Secretary not aware that the Society has presented an account for £77,000, and did so in February of this year, before the date when I raised this issue, in a debate which I initiated, when his Parliamentary Secretary replied that there was no such demand made by it? Will he pay the £77,000, as he undertook to do in the first place?

No; I am informed that this agreement was made by agreement with the Society. It will bring the final payment of Government moneys to £80,000. That means that the Society will have spent only £30,000 out of its own resources on this operation, and will be left with some £60,000, out of £90,000 raised by public subscription as a result of an appeal. The Society has done extremely well; there are some minor disputes on minor bills outstanding with it, which we shall do our best to settle. I am satisfied that we have done the right thing by the Society, and that it has done its duty.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many cars have been towed away for improper parking in the Metropolitan Police district up to date; and in how many of these cases the owners were prosecuted.

I am informed by the Commissioner of Police that, up to 20th May, 148 vehicles were removed from the roads in the Metropolitan Police district under powers conferred on the police by The Removal of Vehicles (England and Wales) Regulations, 1957. The question of proceedings is being considered in all cases.

In the light of experience in London, does my right hon. Friend propose to recommend this practice to the police elsewhere?

I should like to consider that matter. I think that we have made a start in London which, while preserving as much as we possibly can the liberty of the subject, also maintains circulation on the highway.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to a case where a film depicting an escape from captivity was shown to inmates of a Borstal institution, with the result that two youths immediately proceeded to break out; and whether he will take steps to ensure that such unsuitable films will not be shown in future.

In the case to which my hon. and gallant Friend refers, two inmates of Portland Borstal Institution, who were taking part in a route march under escort, absconded after attacking the escort. The previous day they, along with other inmates, had seen the film "The Colditz Story", which bears a "U" certificate and deals with life in a prisoner-of-war camp. My inquiries do not result in establishing any decisive connection between the escape and the showing of the film.

The question of the suitability of films is one which I must leave to the authorities responsible, and I have confidence in their judgment.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in what circumstances the Metropolitan Police are instructed to take fingerprints from persons charged with minor offences.

In ordinary circumstances, the police do not take fingerprints from persons charged with minor offences.

Would the Home Secretary explain how taking a person's fingerprints helps the police to prove a charge of drunkenness?

I would rather not go into detail. If the hon. Gentleman would, perhaps, have a talk with me, I will explain the matter to him.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department on what grounds an order has been issued to the Metropolitan Police, as recently stated in evidence by Inspector Atkinson at the Clerkenwell Magistrates' Court, that all Irishmen's fingerprints are to be taken; and whether, in view of the discrimination involved in this order, he will now have it withdrawn.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department by what authority, and in what circumstances, police officers in the Metropolitan Police district take the fingerprints of Irishmen.

In the absence of a court order, the fingerprints of a person in police custody may be taken only with consent. The instruction mentioned by the hon. Member for Islington, East (Mr. E. Fletcher) was confined to the taking of fingerprints with consent for the purpose of assisting a particular criminal investigation, and the fingerprints taken have been subsequently destroyed.

May we take it from that Answer that the Home Secretary repudiates the suggestion made that the fingerprints of all Irishmen charged with minor offences are in future to be taken?

I should not like to commit myself to any such generalisation.

I understood from the Home Secretary's original reply that this was an individual case wherein a particular person gave his Consent. Would the right hon. Gentleman not be prepared to say that there is no reflection on Irishmen as a whole?

There is no reflection on Irishmen at all. There is also no desire on my part to restrict those authorities responsible for the detection of crime.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that, so far as Irishmen are concerned, whether they are innocent or not, they seldom plead guilty?

May we take it from the reply of the Home Secretary that the statement made by Inspector Atkinson since the recent murder, that it is an order that all Irishmen's fingerprints are to be taken, is either incorrect, as put in that very fruitful newspaper, the Sunday Express, or that the inspector himself is to be reprimanded by the Home Secretary? Further, is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the alarm that this sort of statement has created amongst other minority groups, apart from Irishmen?

It is the fundamental duty of the Home Secretary to protect minorities and the liberty of the subject. I certainly will investigate the particular point to which the hon. Gentleman has drawn my attention, and perhaps communicate with him.