asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that a major British film production company has cut its production plans because of the recent drop in cinema attendances and the high rate of entertainments tax; and, if, in view of the fact that 70 per cent. of the firms exhibited in Great Britain are of foreign manufacture and of the need to expand film exports, he will take action to stimulate a higher level of film production.

The Rank Organisation has stated that it has had to postpone four proposed productions. British film production is helped by means of the screen quota, by the film production levy, and by loans from the National Film Finance Corporation.

Does not the Minister recognise the very serious situation which is coming about? Is he not aware that most of the production companies are now holding their hand awaiting the Budget decision on Entertainments Duty and that this will inevitably mean a drop in British film production which will make it difficult to maintain the quota?

I am aware that there is some anxiety.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that the charges made for the supply of a number of proprietary wood preservatives are excessive; and whether he will introduce price control over these preparations.

I have had no complaints about excessive charges for proprietary wood preservatives.

Is the Minister aware that the actual price of the contents of some of these proprietary wood preservatives and treatments for disease is between 2s. and 3s. a gallon—that is a very generous allowance—and that they are sold at 25s.? There is a real racket going on not only in the actual remedies but in the treatment which a number of firms are advising people to carry out, often unnecessarily. Is the Minister aware that, in the case of a church in the home counties, where immediate treatment costing £600 was recommended although the beetle causing the disease had been dead for several centuries, the money spent was entirely wasted? Further, is the Minister aware that his Department is supposed to protect consumers, and will he not do something about this?

I was not aware of the case mentioned by the hon. Gentleman, and I have no power of price control. If there is a ring, the information can be lodged with the Registrar of Restrictive Trade Practices.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on trade between the United Kingdom and the Union of South Africa in 1956 and 1957, indicating particularly what categories of exports and imports show any significant change.

Exports to South Africa showed a satisfactory rise from £154 million in 1956 to £173 million in 1957, increases being recorded in cars, machinery and iron and steel. Imports, not including uranium and gold, rose by about £2 million in the period. With permission, I will circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Can my right hon. Friend say, firstly, whether the two-way trade weeks had any appreciable effect on trade between these countries and, secondly, whether there are any plans for following up the interest created by that campaign?

I believe those two-way weeks undoubtedly had a good effect, and we are planning to build a United Kingdom pavilion for the Witwatersrand show next year.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the present law regarding the copying of jewellery designs imposes an unfair burden upon those who are victims of this illegal practice and that photographic records afford inadequate protection; and if he will therefore review the matter.

To protect industrial designs by registration the representations of the design must be provided. As acceptable photographs can be and are furnished for jewellery, I cannot see that jewellers bear an unfair burden.

Will the Minister examine an article in this month's British Jeweller giving details of what manufacturers feel to be a tremendous burden? Is not this totally unsatisfactory where there are hundreds and even thousands of designs? Would he look at this matter again, especially in the light of that article and what is done in both France and Germany?

I will look at the article, but of course a large number of designs are now furnished by photographs.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to co-ordinate the running down of arms orders to Tyneside engineering firms with the obtaining of new orders.

I understand that the level of defence—largely Admiralty—requirements in the Tyneside area is likely to be well maintained. Any firms affected by cuts in defence orders are themselves responsible for obtaining new orders in the home market, but the Board of Trade's services are readily available to help with securing export business.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that figures which I have had today from his right hon. Friend show that we have well over 1,000 shipyard workers and almost 500 engineers idle, largely due to the running down of arms orders? Could not this be done somewhat more intelligently? I know that firms themselves are responsible for getting orders, but could not the running down of orders from Service Departments be co-ordinated with the obtaining of other orders by engineering and shipbuilding firms?

It is not my information that these running down orders are Admiralty orders. If they are and the hon. Gentleman will supply me with details, I will consider the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many cinematograph theatres are now unemployed as such or completely closed; and what proportion of the total this represents.

The information is not available in the form requested. After allowing for new and re-opened cinemas, the net number closed during the year 1957 was 175. The number of cinemas now open is 4,085.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that there is a serious danger that a large number of cinemas will close in the near future and that the industry is being seriously affected by the heavy tax imposed on it? Will he advise the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see that removal of the tax takes place when the Budget is presented?

I am aware of that situation, but that question ought to be put to the Chancellor.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the concern about this matter on both sides of the House and in the country and that small cinemas can no longer carry this crushing burden in their struggle for existence?

I agree that cinemas are having a difficult time.

Is there anything to prevent the President announcing the Government's proposed tax concessions in advance of the Budget this year?

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many cinemas have closed in North Staffordshire since 31st December, 1956.

Three, Sir.

Is the Minister aware that, in addition to those he mentioned, others are about to close, and that this is an indication of what is happening generally? In view of the difficulties of the small cinemas, will he not ask his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give sympathetic consideration to the total abolition of Entertainments Duty?

My right hon. Friend may have heard what the hon. Lady has said.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent users of high-powered two-wheel tractors for opencast coal mining and road construction were consulted by the Government before the decision was taken recently to refuse import licences for this equipment.

In accordance with the normal procedure, full account was taken of the information supplied by users in support of these applications.

Although I am all in favour of cutting out unnecessary imports, does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that in a case where actual orders have to be cancelled there ought to be some consultation with the trade beforehand?

There was consultation. The right hon. Gentleman may care to consult his hon. Friend the Member for Lanarkshire, North (Miss Herbison), who pressed me to do exactly the opposite to what he is now asking.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, recently, during the Second Reading debate on the Opencast Coal Bill, representations from both sides of the House were made to the Minister in charge, the Paymaster-General, on the ground that, as opencast coal mining is to be a permanent feature of our mining economy, steps should be taken to ensure that all equipment needed is produced by British engineering firms without resort to dollar imports?

We are trying to do that, and these tractors are now being produced at home.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number, value and area of factories now under construction in the North-East Development Area and the estimated additional employment, giving separate figures for Government and privately-financed schemes.

Two Government-financed projects, in area 11,500 square feet, costing about £31,000 to employ about eighty persons. Eighty-eight privately-financed new projects, each exceeding 5,000 square feet in area, and in total about 4 million square feet, which will employ some 3,000 people. The total cost is not known to the Board of Trade.

Do not the figures show that there is a considerable slackening of effort in this respect? In view of the difficulties now facing the basic industries, coal, shipbuilding and steel, is it not high time that we had a far more vigorous application of the Distribution of Industry Act, 1945, in the North-East?

In the North-East area, the applications for industrial development certificates were higher last year than the year before. That is an exception.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many Government financed factories in the North-East Development Area are now empty; and how many are working at reduced capacity.

Five factories and one storage building are vacant. I am informed that four out of about 300 firms on the Trading Estate are working on short-time.

Are not special efforts being made to find new tenants for the factories? Will the right hon. Gentleman take note that a steelworks in my constituency has just declared that it must close in a few weeks' time, that we have had one empty factory on the North-East Trading Estate standing idle for well over six months? Does not that show that there is a far more complacent attitude now than there has been for some time?

Negotiations are proceeding to find tenants, and if the negotiations succeed one of the tenants will be a newcomer. On the whole, the situation on the North-East Coast is pretty good.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a factory on the Dragonville Trading Estate near Durham City is to close down today? What steps does he intend to take to get another firm to take over immediately?

I did not know about that factory, but if it closes it will at once come under the Board of Trade's review.

When the employment position in the North-East is discussed, will my right hon. Friend remember that the position of heavy engineering and shipbuilding is remarkably satisfactory?

asked the President of the Board of Trade which non-embargoed items, apart from copper wire and the thirty-five categories of goods on the quantitative control list, are affected by the limitation now applied by his Department to British exports to the Soviet bloc and China.

None, Sir.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm the statement made by the Minister without Portfolio in another place that there is a third list of goods—and this is at a time when there is growing unemployment in this country? The first is a list of embargoed goods, the second a list of goods subject to quantitative restrictions, and the third a list which it is considered impolitic to reveal to the public?

I do not know to what list the hon. Gentleman is referring. There are certain goods—scrap iron is one—on which there are limitations for all destinations. Maybe my noble Friend was referring to that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, following his recent interview with representatives of the workers and employers in the cotton industry and the municipal representatives of the cotton towns, he is now in a position to make a statement on Government policy on the cotton industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the outcome of his meeting on 12th March with twenty-three representatives of the United Textile Factory Workers Association about their "Plan for Cotton."

The five mayors and the representatives of the textile trade unions discussed with me the problems of the Lancashire cotton industry and, in particular, the duty-free imports of cloth from the Commonwealth. In addition, I had a valuable exchange of views with the trade union representatives about the conclusions and recommendations in the report "Plan for Cotton". I told both delegations that we hoped the inter-industry negotiations for the limitation of supplies from India and Pakistan would soon be resumed. The Permanent Secretary of the Board of Trade is about to go to Hong Kong in order to have talks with the textile industry there.

In so far as I was able to hear that reply in the noise made from the other side of the House, it appeared as unsatisfactory as the people with whom the right hon. Gentleman negotiated said it was. Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware by now that in this great industry, since the Tories came into office, one man in every four employed had been driven out of the industry by the end of last year, that factories are still closing down, that nothing has been done, that at the last General Election, in 1955, the Tories fought in Lancashire on a promise to aid the industry and that nothing of any kind has been done by the Government who are suffering from creeping paralysis?

If the hon. Member had been able to hear my reply, I think he would not have found it so unsatisfactory. Negotiations are now proceeding.

Which of the seventeen constructive proposals made by the trade unions does the right hon. Gentleman feel able to accept and act upon, particularly since it is felt in Lancashire that without Government support for these proposals the industry will further and further decline?

I told the trade union delegation that I would be interested to know which of the seventeen recommendations had the support of both sides of the industry.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that both sides of the industry would like to know what his proposals are? Will he remember that many of us have been pressing the Government ever since 1951 for plans for the cotton industry, whose rapid contraction was known to everybody, and that throughout the whole of that time the Government have not offered a single proposal of their own but have always dealt with proposals made to them in the way in which the right hon. Gentleman dealt with my hon. Friends' Questions just now?

What the hon. Member said is not true. We have put imports coming in from countries other than the Commonwealth under quota, but it is a different thing to put quotas on Commonwealth goods.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the amount of imports into this country of cotton cloth, stated by yardage and by value, in the twelve months ended 30th September, 1951, and in the twelve months to the last most convenient date for computation.

The imports of woven cotton fabrics in the year ended 30th September, 1951, were 329 million linear yards at a value of £36·3 million, and during the calendar year 1957 amounted to 364 million linear yards valued at £30·3 million.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the import figures given in his own statistics, up to the most recent date, show that there has been roughly a sixteen-fold increase in imports of cotton woven cloth as compared with 1952? Further, is he not aware that over this period his attention has constantly been called to the matter? Are not the negotiations that we are now told about very belated? Will he say what he is going to do?

The hon. Member will find that the figures I gave provide an accurate answer to his question. We now hope that these voluntary agreements will be concluded.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the general complaints made with regard to the quality of imported Chinese eggs and of the fact that there is a surplus of home-produced eggs, he will prohibit further importations.

No, Sir. These eggs may be imported under the open general licence but subject to examination on arrival under the Public Health (Imported Food) Regulations, 1937.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Medical Officer of Health for Greenwich, where most of these eggs are imported, has been making a series of allegations and is asking for an interview with the Minister of Health upon this point? Does my right hon. Friend think it is wise or sensible for us to be importing eggs which have proved to be poisonous when we are quarrelling with our Danish friends about the export to them of eggs certified and stamped as laid in this country?

I shall bring to the attention of my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Health what my hon. Friend has said.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the important reports from public health laboratories on this subject, which were published a few days ago, and consider further action in conjunction with his right hon. and learned Friend?

That is a matter for my right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Health.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will reexamine the provisions for enforcing individual retail price maintenance in the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956, as recommended by Lord Cohen's Council on Prices. Productivity and Incomes.

No Sir, it is too soon after the passing of the Act to reopen this question.

If the Government are not going to take any notice of this part of the Cohen Report and employers and trade unions are to pick out only those parts of it with which they agree, is it not time to close the whole thing down and allow Sir Dennis Robertson to write his prejudiced opinions in the economic journals instead of giving them the authority of a Government Report?

The Report was addressed to the nation at large and not to the Government, and we can all have our views about it.

Does the President agree with this recommendation of the Council?

I have said that I do not think it is timely to take up that point.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will take steps to establish processing or light industry in Shetland.

It is not easy to find an industry which might be expected to settle in Shetland, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and I will continue to do what we can to encourage any suitable new project which comes forward.

Is the Minister aware that the imposition of American restrictions on woollen goods has caused considerable difficulties, which have been added to those already existing? Will he consider taking some new powers to encourage industry in the Highland areas, as throughout those areas his existing powers have not led to any noticeable increase in industry?

We have protested very strongly to the American Government about their action with regard to the wool tariff, and they have undertaken to review the whole question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade by what amount in dollars the 1958 import quotas from Cuba have been increased.

Five hundred and twenty-two thousand dollars, Sir.

Having exported less to and imported £10 million more from Cuba in 1957 than in 1956, how can we earn more dollars by trebling, as the last agreement does, these imports, and multiplying by five times the import of citrus fruits? What is the explanation of this mystery, which baffles the Empire Industries Association and many others concerned with Commonwealth trade? If Lord Beaverbrook were dead—which happily is not the case—it would make him turn in his grave.

No doubt the hon. Member knows that the bulk of our imports from Cuba consists of sugar, which we refine and re-export. We believe that this very small increase in the quotas will assist the two-way trade.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will take steps to prohibit subliminal advertising.

If subliminal advertising is what I am led to believe it is, it is prohibited by the Second Schedule of the Television Act, 1954.

I thank the President for that reply. Will he assure that this very harmful technique is not used by advertisers either on I.T.V. or on cinema screens?

It is illegal to use it on television, and in the case of cinemas the local licensing conditions could forbid it. It is really a question for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this type of advertising is already forbidden among the members of professional advertising associations?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what measures he intends to take to control excessive expenditure on advertising, which is a major factor in the high prices charged for some commodities and which needlessly increases the cost of living.

I do not agree with the hon. Member's hypothesis.

Is the Minister aware that people are getting fed up with having coupons pushed through their doors almost every day of the week and that, especially in the case of detergents, the cost is being kept high by the excessive amount of advertising in which manufacturers are engaging? What does the Minister intend to do about it?

I cannot accept the hon. Member's argument.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that the way in which the nationalised gas and electricity boards advertise the sale of gas and electricity is quite ridiculous, bearing in mind the fact that they enjoy a complete monopoly and that the public has no alternative choice? Would it not be a good thing in this instance to use some control so that the boards could cut down this ridiculous advertising and pass on the benefits to the consumers?

That is what I have been saying for many years.

I can understand my hon. and gallant Friend's feelings, but if the public has no other choice it is perhaps as well that these things should be brought to its notice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what professional qualifications are held by the officer he has appointed to the post of Comptroller-General of the Patent Office.

The officer appointed has a first-class record as an administrator, which I consider the qualification most urgently required for the post.

Surely the President realises that this is most unsatisfactory. Without wishing to reflect upon the suitability of the Comptroller-General and other high appointments, may I ask him if he realises that ours is now the only major Patent Office in the world which does not have a man of high professional reputation at its head? This is a reversal of a thirty-year-old-policy.

The Office has a large staff, and I consider that it requires men of administrative ability at the top. One of the things that I have asked the new Comptroller to do is to give the scientists on the staff a better chance to learn about administration so that next time we can perhaps go back to the old method of choosing someone within the Office.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will at an early date cause a substantial reduction of Purchase Tax to be made on all articles which contribute materially to national efficiency and which are now subject to high rates of tax, in particular, such items as office equipment, kitchen appliances and apparatus, clocks and watches, commercial vehicle chassis, drugs and medicines and essential toilet preparations; and what was the approximate revenue from Purchase Tax on these items for the last twelve months for which figures are available.

My hon. Friend will not expect me to anticipate my Budget statement. The revenue in 1957 from the articles listed was £127 million.

I never expect my right hon. Friend to anticipate anything, but would he not have regard to the fact that on 15th April the nation expects him to produce a Budget which will be conducive to an improvement in industrial production and efficiency, as a first budgetary requirement?

Sometimes I anticipate a modicum of trouble from my hon. Friend.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the ever-increasing obstacles to house ownership resulting from Government policy, what consideration he has given to providing financial incentives to would-be owner-occupiers and to relieving building societies of financial obligations to enable them to offer more favourable terms to borrowers for house purchase purposes than is at present possible.

I regret that I cannot anticipate my Budget statement.

As spokesman for a party that has had so much to say about a property-owning democracy, does not the Chancellor think it is about time that something was given to the would-be house owner? Is he not aware that building societies are having to turn away six or seven times as many people as they can help? In this year of the Rent Act, cannot he say something to encourage those who want to buy their own houses?

I think we must keep this matter in perspective, and I hope that the hon. Gentleman will. The figures for new houses built for private ownership are not by any means bad, and in addition, in 1957, the building societies lent an all-time record total for this purpose.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much was paid over to the Treasury by building societies in Income Tax and Profits Tax for twelve months up to the latest convenient date.

I regret that I am unable to give separate figures of the tax paid by building societies.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that in the last Finance Bill his predecessor gave an undertaking that he would sympathetically consider this point before the next Budget? Does he intend to be as liberal as his predecessor, or is he to be a proper stick-in-the-mud? And when he speaks about the increased building society business, is he not aware that prices have gone up considerably?

I think I must answer the hon. Gentleman's rather long supplementary by saying, again, that I cannot anticipate my Budget statement.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that in fact these building societies are non-profit-making bodies? If they are subject to Profits Tax, is not the cure in their own hands?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the yearly value of the benefits provided by the State by way of medical and educational services and by way of a subsidy on a council house to an average head of a family supporting his wife and two children of secondary school age.

The average cost of educating two children at a maintained secondary school is at present about £154 a year, excluding the net cost of school meals and milk. It is not possible to estimate the average value of the other benefits mentioned in the question for families of a particular size or type, but the average cost to the Exchequer of the general medical, dental, pharmaceutical, ophthalmic and hospital services is about £12 a year per head of the population. The annual Exchequer grant to local authorities for permanent housing, if spread over the total number of permanent local authority houses, amounts to about £19 per house.

If I understand that Answer aright, it means that the average head of a family with two children at secondary school is getting benefits worth about £150 for education, about £48 for National Health, and another £20 or so for council house subsidy, which means the receipt of over £200 a year. Would my right hon. Friend, therefore, point out in his next speech that anyone earning £10 or £11 a week is getting from the general body of taxpayers benefits amounting to about £4 a week?

I agree that it is desirable that everybody should be aware of the kind of figures I have given in reply to my hon. Friend's Question.

Does the Chancellor not agree that the object of his hon. Friend's Question was designed to show that the Welfare State is a bad thing and, indeed, is so regarded apparently, by hon. Members opposite?

I do not think the right hon. Gentleman should make that assumption.

On a point of explanation, Mr. Speaker——

No.

I do not think anything arises on this.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. If the object of my Question is being impugned by the right hon. Gentleman opposite, am I not in order to say that I put down the Question merely to bring out the figures my right hon. Friend has given?

I think the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary was a general accusation against those on the other side of the House. We are quite accustomed to these general accusations from both sides, and I do not think anyone need bother about them very much.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if the statement of his predecessor to the effect that Entertainments Duty on cinemas is not a significant handicap to film exports represents the present policy of his Department.

The statement by my predecessor to which the hon. Member refers seems to me to have been not so such a statement of policy as an assessment of the facts. That assessment still stands.

In that case, would the Chancellor ask his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to submit to him before the Budget a memorandum on the reasons why British film production is now being cut, and being cut in a way that will undoubtedly reduce export earnings next year and the year following? Will he explain to him the part that Entertainments Duty is playing in this decline in the industry?

My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and I are in very close touch on these matters.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he will receive a deputation from the Association of Independent Cinemas on the subject of Entertainments Duty.

I have asked senior officials of the Customs and Excise who deal with matters concerning Entertainments Duty to receive this deputation on my behalf.

Am I right in saying that my right hon. Friend has already received a deputation from the A.I.T.C., and will he not bear in mind that the A.I.C. itself is very anxious to meet him and the officials of his Department and not, so to speak, be fobbed off and sent to the Customs and Excise? Is he aware that the members themselves think they are in the best position to speak for their own case, which affects the smaller cinemas in particular, and are very anxious indeed to lay their representations before him?

Of course, I wish that I were able to receive all these delegations myself, but the All-Industry Tax Committee has been received, on my behalf, by my hon. and learned Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, and that Committee, I understand, really does represent the whole of the industry.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what amount revenue from Entertainments Duty has fallen in the last three months as a consequence of cinemas having to close.

I regret that this information is not available.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the Answer given by his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to a Question earlier this afternoon, which indicated the very hard times through which smaller cinemas are going, which may be attributable to the incidence of Entertainments Duty?

Yes, I can assure my hon. Friend that I will bear that in mind.

Is not the truth of the matter that, since television, we have far too many cinemas?

I think there may be something in what the hon. and learned Gentleman says.

In view of the fact that every time there is an increase in Entertainments Duty it is passed on to the public, are we now to assume that if the Duty is removed the full benefit will be appropriated by the cinema people?

I am afraid that I cannot make any more comment on this subject at the present time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why cheques drawn on Government account require endorsement by the payee despite the provisions of the Cheques Act, 1957, and contrary to usual practice.

In the matter of endorsements, cheques drawn by Government Departments are treated in the same way as other cheques; but Section 3 of the Cheques Act, 1957, does not apply to payable orders and similar instruments used by Government Departments for certain types of payment, and these must still be signed by the payee.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the other day I received a payable order from the Fees Office which needed endorsement? If these payable orders do not come under Section 4 of the Cheques Act, will he consider amending the Act so as to bring this into line with ordinary commercial practice?

In reply to the first part of my hon. Friend's Question, I congratulate him. As to the other parts of his Question, there are many purposes for which the signature of the payee is essential, and the recommendation of the Committee on Cheque Endorsement was that Government orders should be excluded from the legislation at that time proposed. I think I can assure my hon. Friend, however, that I will watch the situation to see, in the light of experience, how our present arrangements are working out.

Would the Chancellor of the Exchequer bear in mind that at any rate on this side there are many of us who would be very willing indeed to endorse cheques? I personally would endorse as many as he cared to send me.

I would reciprocate that willingness.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will appoint an engineer or technologist with experience of productive industry as an additional member of the Council on Prices, Productivity and Incomes.

I have nothing to add to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Paymaster-General on 6th March to the hon. Member for Northfield (Mr. Chapman).

In view of the depressing and academic nature of the reflections of this Council so far, would it be permissible to have on it someone who understands the problems of production and believes in expansion?

I cannot subscribe to the description of the Report given by the hon. Member.

Will the Chancellor bear in mind that many of us on this side of the House are very grateful to the Cohen Committee for having confirmed what most of us have been saying throughout our public life, that we cannot have full employment or expansion in a capitalist society?

I am always grateful for any evidence of gratitude from the hon. Member.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is now in a position to announce his decision regarding an extension of the time allowed to taxpayers in which to give notice of appeal against assessments.

Not yet, Sir.

Can the Chancellor give any indication of when a decision will be announced? In any case, can he give an assurance that he will give a decision before the next crop of assessments comes out?

No, I am afraid I cannot satisfy the hon. Member's curiosity as to any date or time, but I can assure him that I have not forgotten the point he has raised.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action he will take to relieve the financial embarrassment of sterling area countries which have invested a substantial portion of their London balances in long-dated British Government securities.

I cannot undertake to make special arrangements with any particular holders of Government securities to insulate them from the effect of monetary policy.

While no one expects the right hon. Gentleman to make special arrangements, may I ask if he is aware that his monetary policy is causing severe hardship in the sterling area countries, which are already suffering from the slump in world commodity prices? Is not his policy of attracting investment to short-term investments thereby counter-acting the very policy of the Government?

I doubt very much whether the countries concerned are suffering hardship, for this particular reason, at any rate. As I think the hon. Member knows, all independent Commonwealth countries, and most Colonial Governments, are responsible for their own investment policies.

May I ask my right hon. Friend whether the embarrassment these countries are suffering is more from being encouraged to invest in undated stocks such as "Daltons"?

It is a question of taste.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that anyone who pays a low interest on a stock issue like "Daltons" expects capital value to fall but does not expect a high interest to deteriorate so much as this?

I do not remember the right hon. Member for Bishop Auckland (Mr. Dalton) advising the House that those stocks were likely to fall at any time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by how much total repayments from National Savings certificates, Defence Bonds, the Post Office Savings Bank, and Trustee Savings Banks, together, have exceeded receipts in the first 48 weeks of the financial year 1957–58; and what was the corresponding figure for the first 48 weeks of the financial year 1956–57.

I am circulating the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that during the last few months there has been a serious deterioration in this respect and that he is faced with the situation that either he must lower the Bank Rate or raise interest rates on National Savings, or see some permanent deterioration of the national currency?

I agree with the hon. Member partly that the reason for the lower net investments in small national savings is the high interest rates which are temporarily current on other stocks.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in order to relieve the financial burden of those who care for their elderly people at home, he will increase the Income Tax allowance in respect of dependent relatives.

I have noted my hon. Friend's suggestion.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will give an instruction to the Inland Revenue that the services of district valuers be made available to advise nationalised industries or any part of them as to current market values for properties which they may wish to acquire in the public interest.

District valuers have for some years helped certain of the nationalised industries in acquisitions or disposals of property and are always ready to co-operate if requests are received for an extension of this service.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether that was the case in the recent purchase by the Atomic Energy Authority of Durley Hall Hotel, Bournemouth? If so, what was the price paid by the Authority and why was the price greater than that demanded on the books of the estate agents? In any case, why did the Authority have to go to Bournemouth? Could it not have gone nearer to Winfreth Heath?

I am afraid it is not my responsibility to answer that question, except in one part, that I understand the district valuer's services have been available to the Atomic Energy Authority on some occasions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury last met to give their consent to the payment of grants to local authorities in Scotland.

For over 100 years the Lords Commissioners have not met as the Board of Treasury, except on ceremonial occasions. Before that there were virtually no grants to consider.

We were assured the other day that before payments could be made to Scottish local authorities they must be sanctioned by the Lords Commissioners of the Treasury. Is every occasion of granting money to Scotland a ceremonial occasion? Is it only then that the Commissioners meet, or was the information given us in Committee inaccurate and is the work actually done by a Treasury official?

No, the point I was making was that the Lords Commissioners did not carry out their functions by formal meetings. If the hon. Member were to issue an invitation to the extreme North and give a guarantee that officially we should be received with that hospitality with which we are accustomed when we go to Scotland——

Bring the money.

—my six colleagues and I would be glad to consider accepting such an invitation, but not during Parliamentary time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what he estimates will be the revenue for the current fiscal year derived from Income Tax, Schedule A, payable by owner-occupiers of residential property.

About £34 million.

When formulating his Budget proposals, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that this annual capital tax is a deterrent to house ownership and ought to be abolished?

I shall certainly take into account what my hon. Friend has said.