asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has now had an opportunity to discuss with leaders of the British motor industry the damage which is being caused to their efficiency and to the maintenance and development of their export trade by the retention of the Purchase Tax at 30 per cent. on commercial vehicles chassis and 60 per cent. on motor cars; and whether he has now had adequate opportunity to examine their arguments and the need for remedial action.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply given to the hon. Member for Northfield (Mr. Chapman) on 5th February.

That was no good at all. Does not my right hon. Friend recall that he gave the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Chapman) and myself some unequivocal assurances in Committee on the Finance Bill last May that he would undertake to enter into negotiations with motor vehicle manufacturers? Is he aware that we understood that answer to imply that he proposed to make a statement on these matters long ahead of the 1959 Budget? Would my right hon. Friend comment on those facts?

My only comment would be that I should not care to give the kind of reply which my hon. Friend would regard as a good one on these matters just at the present time.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what loss of revenue there would be if Purchase Tax on motor cars were abolished and motor cars ceased to rank as a business expense?

If the hon. Member will put a Question on the Order Paper, I will see whether I can give him an answer or not.

A very good answer that time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has yet given an indication to the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation that he will give consideration to the recommendation, contained in its report of 7th December, 1958, that there is a long-term need for the reduction of Purchase Tax in the United Kingdom especially in the highest ranges; and what has been the precise nature of his reply to the proposal.

I assume my hon. Friend has in mind the survey of economic conditions in the United Kingdom published by the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation in November, 1958. The survey called for no reply from me but I have noted the views expressed.

Can my right hon. Friend give the House an assurance that the rupture of negotiations on the subject of the European Common Market and the Free Trade Area will not in any way influence any future decision which he may take arising from advice given by O.E.E.C.? Does my right hon. Friend still regard that advice as valid and useful, and will he have some regard to it between now and April?

I am always glad of advice from any quarter, and I always attach the appropriate weight to that advice.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has considered the communication of the hon. Member for Manchester, Wythenshawe, regarding certain types of gas and coke fires; and whether he will make a further statement with regard to Purchase Tax on this type of combined appliance.

Yes, Sir. As I have written to my hon. Friend to explain, combination gas and coke fires of the kind she has in mind are taxable at the rate of 30 per cent. She will not expect me to say more than that I will bear in mind her interest in this appliance.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I am very grateful for his promise that he will bear this problem in mind when he is considering his Budget, because the tax on the whole appliance has made it extra costly when people are trying to comply with clean air legislation?

My hon. Friend will realise that there is no anomaly, since gas and electric stoves are subject to Purchase Tax and only coke and other hard fuel stoves are exempt.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that the hold-up on the subject of fuel and heating is delaying what should be a major step forward in Manchester's hospital arrangements, a step which is badly needed?

I will take note of what my right hon. Friend has said.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer for what reasons he has announced imposition of Purchase Tax on second-hand gem jewellery; whether tax is payable each time the article is resold or only on first resale; how the wholesale value is to be assessed; what revenue anticipations he has in this context; what articles, other than second-hand gem jewellery, attract Purchase Tax when sold second-hand; whether he now proposes to extend Purchase Tax to other articles when sold second-hand; and, having regard to the wide implications for trade and industry of his decision to extend the scope of Purchase Tax, whether he will make a statement.

The answers to these seven questions respectively are: to remove a cloak for malpractices; each time there is a sale by wholesale to an unregistered person; in accordance with the statutory definition of value; no estimate is possible; imported chargeable goods, secondhand at the time of importation; no, Sir; no. Sir.

Is not this a disgraceful precedent? Is not it the fact that in the entire history of Purchase Tax law since 1940, it has never been applied to second-hand articles? Having regard to the precedent, which I am very grieved that a Conservative Chancellor should establish, will not it provide the means in the future for another Chancellor, for example, to put Purchase Tax on second-hand motor-cars, or second-hand fur coats, and second-hand furniture, finishing up with the wares of the rag-and-bone man? [HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] Is there to be no end to these predatory habits of my right hon. Friend?

I do not think that I agree with anything that my hon. Friend has said in that supplementary question. It is, of course, not an extension of Purchase Tax in a new field. It is the withdrawal of an administrative concession.

It has never been done before.

My hon. Friend is not right in saying that there is no precedent. Purchase Tax is payable on articles eligible for Purchase Tax but imported second-hand.

While I appreciate the Chancellor's remarks on malpractices, may I ask if he will bear in mind the fact that reputable jewellers believe that, if Purchase Tax were reduced slightly below its present level, it would make it quite unprofitable for anyone to indulge in the practices to which he referred?

I remember with interest the hon. Gentleman saying something of the same kind last year. I did, in fact, reduce the Purchase Tax, but I am afraid that the abuses have continued.

May I ask whether my right hon. Friend is aware that the number of jewellery craftsmen in Birmingham is falling year after year, and that the Purchase; Tax is one of the main reasons for it?

I will take note of my hon. Friend's views.

On a point of order. In view of the highly unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg leave to give notice that I will raise this matter on the Motion for the Adjournment at the earliest minute.

Further to that point of order. Is it in order to raise on the Motion for the Adjournment a matter involving legislation on tax changes?

We can consider that question when the hon. Member gives notice.

On a fresh point of order. Did not you rule in November, 1957, Sir, that a Member of this House might raise on the Motion for the Adjournment any matter affecting the Purchase Tax, including individual Purchase Tax rates, having regard to the fact that no new legislation is required, and that only a Treasury Order is entailed?

The general position is that if these matters can be done by regulations, they can be raised on the Motion for the Adjournment, but not if an alteration of a Statute is required. However, it depends what the remedy for the hon. Member's grievance is.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in anticipation of his Budget statement, he will survey the items which contribute to safety in the home, and which carry Customs Duty and Purchase Tax, with a view to relieving the nation of costly and continuous medical, surgical, and hospital treatment.

I know the hon. Lady's interest in this matter and I shall keep it in mind during my annual review of taxation.

Is the Chancellor aware that the Government have just undertaken a big campaign to lessen the incidence of home accidents, and that the one remaining nigger in the woodpile is himself? Will he get out of the woodpile as quickly as possible?

I am very disappointed. When I was working in another capacity, I used to receive the most charming letters from the hon. Lady on the subject of food. I am sorry now that she has seen fit to refer to me as the nigger in the woodpile after those very happy days which I re- member when I used to receive letters from her on food.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what consultations he had with representatives of the jewel trade as a whole, and with the Fine Art Auctioneers of London or the London Chamber of Commerce, before the recent proposal to reimpose Purchase Tax at 30 per cent. on second-hand gem jewellery; what representations he has had from the trade since this proposal was made; and whether he has been made aware of the unanimous views in the trade of the effect that this proposal will have on the London market, which is at present held in world-wide esteem.

No formal consultations, but the Customs and Excise keeps itself informed of trade opinion through many informal contacts. I have just received the London auctioneers' memorandum on this matter and I will give this and any other submissions from the trade my careful consideration.

If there is a nut here which needs cracking—which seems to be the case—why not prosecute the offender in the normal way, instead of producing this large and hefty sledgehammer, the use of which may easily hurt the innocent? In view of the importance of the representations made to my right hon. Friend, may I ask him to postpone the reimposition of this tax until he has had a full opportunity for consultation with the recognised representatives of the second-hand gem trade in London?

Of course, we shall be glad to authorise prosecutions when satisfactory evidence can be collected, but that is often difficult to do. I will consider the suggestion of some deferment while I am considering the further representations being made to me, and I will make an announcement on that point within the next two or three days.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the amount claimed, or his estimate of the amount claimed, in the latest convenient year, by residential owner-occupiers as being payable by them in respect of their owner-occupied residential accommodation by way of ground rent, and the amount of Income Tax at standard rate which they would be entitled to deduct from such payments.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer my hon. and learned Friend, the Financial Secretary gave him on 18th November.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the figures apparently were not available at that time but that every taxpayer is required to complete on his return of income and claimed allowances a note of the claim he makes in respect of ground rent payments by him? Cannot my right hon. Friend give an answer?

The difficulty is that the details asked for are not available, because the taxation of ground rent is not normally tied up with the Schedule A assessments in respect of which they are paid. It is the aggregation of information which is not possible without a very great deal of expenditure of time.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to what extent claims for relief from Income Tax, Schedule A, by virtue of payments of ground rent by residential owner-occupiers, have been taken into account in his estimate of a net revenue of £34 millions from Income Tax, Schedule A, as applied to residential owner-occupiers.

Not at all.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if Schedule A tax for owner-occupiers were abolished, the tax paid on ground rents could be deducted under another Schedule? Will he bear in mind that whereas window tax lasted for 155 years, this iniquitous tax will have lasted 156 years up to the date of his next Budget? Does not he feel that the time has come to do away with Schedule A tax?

I have taken note of what my hon. Friend says, but his supplementary question is rather hypothetical.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that one of the deterrents to a man purchasing his own home is the fact that he has to pay Schedule A tax on the house which he occupies; and if he will now give consideration to the reduction or abolition of this tax.

The hon. Gentleman will not expect me to anticipate by Budget statement.

Is the Chancellor aware that the Government have been advocating for a large number of years a property-owning democracy, inferring that we on this side of the House are opposed to people owning their own houses? Is he aware that this tax prevents people from purchasing their own houses, and that a man living in a house costing £3,000 has to pay 6s. 2d. a week as tax? Will he do something to relieve house owners; of this terrible burden?

I quite agree with the first part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, and I will take note of what he said in the second part.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will name the groups for whom he has financial responsibility whose incomes from salaries and pensions are estimated, after allowing for the decreases in purchasing power and rises in the cost of living, to be equivalent to those payable in 1952, as is the case of people covered by the Pensions (Increase) Act and receiving pensions under the Royal Warrant.

I could not say without disproportionate expenditure of time whether the movements in salaries everywhere in this field since 1952 have maintained purchasing power at the 1952 level. As my hon. Friend well knows, the Pensions (Increase) Acts were intended to deal with cases of hardship and not to increase all public service pensions in proportion to the cost of living.

Will my right hon. Friend accept my services, and take it from me that there are no groups which are in the unfortunate position of those to whom I refer in my Question? Will he reconsider his decision and try to deal generously with those who have served the State well?

I will certainly accept my hon. Friend's services.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give an assurance that no action will be taken on the Coleraine Committee's recommendations for increased remuneration for the higher civil servants, without a further Pensions Increase Act, the counting of unestablished service for pensions purposes and the increase of pensions under the Royal Warrant.

My hon. Friend will not expect me to give any such assurance.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that senior civil servants, whose integrity and competence are unassailable, would prefer that their predecessors, who made possible their succession and who helped to build up our present Civil Service, should be generously treated, and that it would make succeeding civil servants much happier if the Treasury could behave as a good and generous employer should?

The Treasury does try, I think with success, to behave as a good and generous employer, and I will take note of what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what reply he has sent to the letter of the hon. Member for Tynemouth relating to the Arts Council.

As far as I know, I have answered all my hon. Friend's letters. If she has any particular point perhaps she will write to me or raise it with my hon. and learned Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, whom I understand she is seeing tomorrow.

Will my right hon. Friend agree that from my point of view his letters, when duly answered, have been most unsatisfactory? Can he explain to me—and this was the subject of my most recent letters—why a Government spokesman should give an entirely misleading account of the relationship between the Arts Council and the Carl Rosa? Does not he agree that that does not represent good government? I had always understood that Answers were straightforward and honourably given.

I am sorry about my letters to my hon. Friend. I must try to do better. However, I am sure that she would not wish that everything in those letters should be published in HANSARD.

I would love it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer his estimates of the quantities of steel which will be required for the fulfilment of investment programmes in the public sector in each quarter of the year 1959.

It is estimated that the 1959 public investment programme will require very roughly 2¼ million tons of finished steel. I regret that estimates of the amount needed in each quarter of 1959 are not available.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what increase that figure represents over the past year, and how much of the slack in the steel industry, now resulting in unemployment and unused capacity, he expects to take up by that increase?

I am afraid that it is very difficult to say. This is an estimate of what we believe will be about the take-up of steel in the public investment projects which will be carried out during the present year. I would say that the amount would be somewhat above last year's. The total of the programme is considerably in excess, of course, but I find it difficult to compute exactly the component of steel in the projects.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman badly failing in his duty to the Iron and Steel Board? How can the Iron and Steel Board plan for an increased output of steel if the right hon. Gentleman cannot be more precise than this in his estimates?

I think that when the projects are seen, the Iron and Steel Board will be in a better position than I am to compute the component of steel.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the approximate annual total of public funds now being spent on research on automation and electronic controls and related matters.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given on 5th February by my hon. and learned Friend the Financial Secretary to the hon. Member for Gorton (Mr. Zilliacus). No useful estimate of the total of Government expenditure over this wide field can be made.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we are unfortunately falling behind some other countries which are our competitors in this matter? Does he not know that whereas almost all the transfer machines at present being installed in British factories are being imported, our biggest transfer manufacturer has just laid off half his staff? Will he consult his right hon. Friends directly concerned with these matters to see whether something can be done to remedy this very grave situation?

I will take note of what the hon. Member has said. I could not agree with him more about the importance of this aspect of industrial development. It is something of the utmost importance to this country.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps he is taking to ensure that British businessmen receive adequate compensation for damage done to their sequestrated businesses and property in Egypt; and if Her Majesty's Government will refrain from releasing any of Egypt's sterling balances now frozen in London until they are satisfied that all British subjects who resided in, or owned property in, Egypt have been fairly treated.

I would ask my hon. Friend to await the terms of the proposed agreement which will be published as soon as it has been signed.

Has my right hon. Friend's attention been drawn to the experience of the French community in Egypt who were swindled right, centre and left by the Egyptians? Has he had his attention drawn to the statement made by the Chairman of the British Community's Association which suggests that the same thing may happen to British subjects? Will he at least make full use of the bargaining counter of the blocked sterling balances to gain fair treatment for our fellow citizens?

I hope to make a full statement on this matter in the event of an agreement being signed.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the agreement is on the whole fair, having regard to our anxieties and concern in the matter, and will he say whether the Government have been over-generous to the Egyptians on the ground that the Government now regard President Nasser as our best ally against Communism in the Middle East?

I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will wait until the agreement is signed, as I hope, when I shall make a statement to the House.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is now in a position to make a further statement to the House on the results of the visit of the President of the World Bank to Colonel Nasser to negotiate in regard to British interests in Egypt.

I regret that I am not yet able to add to the reply which I gave to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Huyton (Mr. H. Wilson) and other hon. Members on 17th February.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that if the compensation terms are fair many people in this country would like there to be a financial settlement so that more trade can be done with Egypt, especially in view of the fact that Western Germany has been making inroads into British trade in the last few months?

I certainly share my hon. Friend's views that a satisfactory financial settlement would be a great advantage, and I hope that we shall get one.

Will the Chancellor say whether it is or is not a fact that in this agreement the Government are, in effect, paying between £50 million and £100 million compensation for damage done at Suez, because of the fact that they have failed to press for compensation for the stores and installations taken over by the Egyptians from the Suez base?

I think that, once again, I must ask the right hon. Gentleman to await the statement that will be made if and when the agreement is signed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer why, under his regulations, when a psychiatrist undergoes a training analysis for the purpose of increasing his therapeutic skill, no part of the cost of such an analysis is allowed by the Inland Revenue authorities as a deduction from income for Income Tax purposes.

If, as I assume, the hon. Member's Question relates to psychiatrists in salaried employment assessed under Schedule E, the cost of personal analysis is not regarded as satisfying the test laid down by law, which is that expenses are deductible only if incurred wholly, exclusively and necessarily in the performance of the duties of the employment.

Is the Chancellor aware that the purpose of this analysis is solely to make a man a better doctor? Is he aware that many younger psychiatrists are spending as much as £500 a year—perhaps one-third of their gross salary—on these courses in the interests of their patients? Will he have discussions with his right hon. and learned Friend the Minister of Health to see whether some steps can be taken towards remedying this gross injustice?

I do not disagree with what the hon. Member has said about the importance of this training, but as he knows, the test in the case of employed persons under Schedule E is very strict, and these courses, deserving as they are, do not seem to amount to an essential qualification for employment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will take steps to equate the financial position of 18–19 year old youths taking a sandwich course in the engineering industry leading to a technical diploma, who pay tax on their incomes and whose parents are not entitled to child allowances, with the financial position of university students, whose parents benefit by the child allowances and who do not pay Income Tax on their maintenance and vacation grants or on their vacation earnings.

I have noted the hon. Member's suggestion.

While appreciating that the Chancellor cannot anticipate his Budget Statement, may I ask him if it is not a fact that the sandwich course is a new thing to encourage the development of technicians? Would he look at the question of giving further financial inducements and encouragement to increase the incentive to take these courses?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that sandwich courses are very important indeed, and I will take note of his suggestion.

Has the Chancellor sympathetically noted what my hon. Friend 'has said, because of the importance of this matter in this new era?

I have sympathetically noted the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, anyhow.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will state the value of the goods bought in 1958 by East Germany, through London, but which did not touch any British port.

I regret that the value of this merchanting trade in 1958 is not known.

The Chancellor agrees, I take it, that this trade does exist? Would he agree that it is trade that ought to be discouraged, and, as far as possible, should be discouraged by him, in view of the fact that it makes no impact on employment in this country, particularly in view of the great need to get more jobs for unemployed people?

No. I do not think I can agree with the hon. Gentleman in the view which he has expressed, which appears to me to be a rather narrow view regarding trade.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what reply he sent to the invitation to meet Sir Alec Guinness and certain other film stars last Wednesday to hear representations about the entertainments tax.

I received a notice of the meeting and it was acknowledged.

Would not the Chancellor agree that on this occasion a little Guinness would have done him good? Would he now agree to return the compliment and say that he will be good for Guinness and the British public by saying that he will abolish the cinema tax?

I receive few invitations to meet film stars and normally this invitation would have been something I should have welcomed. But it contained these words:

"You yourself no doubt will be unable to be present."

In those circumstances, I left it to the representatives of the trade to make representations to hon. Members who, no doubt, will make representations to me.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury if he will make a statement con cerning the transfer of a Government Department to Durham.

I am not yet in a position to make a statement, but I am continuing to make efforts to find a suitable Government office for transfer to Durham.

When will the Government make up their mind about this matter? It has been considered for the past six or seven years, which is a long time. May I ask the hon. and learned Gentleman to bear in mind that the city council and the county council are anxious that the Minister should determine what Department is coming to Durham and that a speedy decision should be made?

Both on the wider grounds, and as a political neighbour of the hon. Gentleman in the North-East, I sympathise with the view he has advanced. On the other hand, we must carefully consider the interests of the public service and particularly the interests and convenience of the staff for whom we are responsible.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall endeavour to raise the matter on the Adjournment as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what percentage of out- standing debenture, unsecured loan, and preference stock in the Steel Company of Wales is held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency; and the average rate of interest.

All the debenture stock in the Steel Company of Wales, Limited, is held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency. The average rate of interest is 5⅝ per cent. The company has no unsecured loan or preference stock.

As the public, or the taxpayers, seem to own the whole of this plant, would not it be justifiable that the Agency should also get the equity stock, so that in addition to financing the job the taxpayers may have the profits?

The Agency holds the prior charges and the investment public holds the ordinary shares, which seems a satisfactory arrangement. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what percentage of outstanding debenture, unsecured loan, and preference stock in Stewarts and Lloyds, Limited, is held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency; and the average rate of interest.

All the preference shares and unsecured loan stock in Stewarts and Lloyds, Limited, are held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency. The average rate of interest is 5 per cent. The company has no debentures

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that there are many people who feel that it is not cricket when private companies use resources provided entirely by the taxpayer, and the profitability arising from those resources, to attack the public when it is suggested that the public may have the equity stock as well?

That is another question, but I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that ownership of ordinary shares makes one eligible to share the losses as well as the profits.

Are we to understand from the earlier answer given by the Economic Secretary that the Government have no intention of selling any of the debenture stock still held in the iron and steel industry?

I should not like to say anything about the Government's intentions in this matter at the present time.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell the House what is the dividend on the equity or ordinary shares of this concern as compared with the 5 per cent. on the Government investment, and if it is more than the Government investment, why are the taxpayers left holding the sticky end of the stick?

The advantage to a prior charge holder is, of course, that he receives the interest in good years and bad. Equity holders get a dividend in good years but nothing in bad years. I have not the figures for which the right hon. Gentleman asked but I shall be glad to send them to him, if he wishes.

asked the Secretary to the Treasury what percentage of outstanding debenture, unsecured loan, and preference stock in Colvilles, Limited, is held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency; and the average rate of interest thereon.

All the preference share in Colvilles, Limited, are held by the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency; 62½ per cent. of the debenture stock is held by the Agency. The average rate of interest is 5 per cent. The company has no unsecured loan stock.

Does not the hon. Gentleman appreciate that, with his usual canniness, the Scot is not prepared to finance this privately-owned concern—as is obvious from the figures which the hon. Gentleman has given to us—because he is afraid that most of his money will be thrown away on Tory propaganda?

The fact is that after reorganisation no less than 10 million shares of a nominal value of £1 were sold to the public at a price of 26s. a share, which shows that the public were prepared to invest in this excellent company.

Is not it much more likely that the ordinary canny Scot, like other people in the British Isles, is more deterred by the Labour Party's threat to renationalise the industry?

I agree with my hon. Friend. If the Labour Party would drop its renationalisation proposals, it would be a great help to the British iron and steel industry.

Will the hon. Gentleman say what capital gains have been made by the holders of the equity capital in this company since denationalisation?

That is another question, and I will not attempt to answer it today.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. May I draw your attention to the fact that today is the first day on which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has answered Questions in this House since 9th December, and on present form we shall not get Answers from him again until 21st April? In view of our right and duty to keep a Parliamentary control on finance, may I ask you, Mr. Speaker, to bear this in mind next time consideration is given to the rearrangement of Questions, so that the Chancellor may be available to the House more often than once every eight or ten weeks?

That is not a matter for me, but no doubt what the right hon. Gentleman has said will receive consideration in the proper quarters.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what progress has been made in the proposal to construct a movable flood barrier designed to prevent flooding in the Thames Valley and a repetition of the disastrous floods of 1953.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he now has any statement to make regarding the proposal for a Thames barrage scheme made by the Waverley Committee after the 1953 flood disaster.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what progress is being made in the study of the proposal for a Thames barrage scheme as recommended by the Waverley Committee.

Following consideration of the recommendations made by the Waverley Committee on Coastal Flooding, two firms of consulting engineers were appointed to prepare a report on the practicability, design and estimated cost of constructing a movable flood barrier at a suitable point on the River Thames. These two firms have reported to me, and I am arranging to publish as soon as possible a summary of their views and conclusions. In the meantime I am considering their findings, in consultation with several of my right hon. Friends who are also concerned. Difficult and complicated questions are at issue here, but I am keenly aware of the importance of the matter and the need to reach some decision, and I will make a further statement as soon as I can.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that statement. As there is so much interest in this matter, will he say whether he is pleased with what has been put before him? Does he think that it contains any hope for the future?

I have received these two important reports from the firms of consulting engineers. I think that my right course now is to put them into a convenient form which would be not quite so lengthy and technical as are the original reports, so that the public and all interested bodies may be able to judge them.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Waverley Committee recommended in May, 1954, that the feasibility of the scheme should be examined at an early date? Can he speed up any publication, because a great deal of water has passed under London Bridge since then and fears of these dangers still exist in the Thames area?

I hope that my Answer will give general satisfaction. I have received these reports and I am proposing to publish summaries of them as soon as I can.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs, in connection with the designating of smokeless zones, what action his Department takes, before he confirms smoke control area orders, to ensure that there will be available adequate supplies of the suitable types of fuel necessary to give satisfactory results in modern domestic solid fuel appliances.

The estimated fuel requirements for every proposed smoke control area are considered by the appropriate regional advisory committee on smokeless fuels, which reports to my noble Friend the Minister of Power about the prospects of supply of suitable fuels to meet these requirements. My noble Friend advises on the basis of these reports before my right hon. Friend decides whether to confirm any Smoke Control Order.

In view of all the care that is taken, will the Minister explain why, when there are plenty of stocks of smokeless fuel, there is so much dissatisfaction that it does not seem to burn in any of the appliances that are available? What is done to see that one matches up with the other?

My advice is that there are ample supplies of suitable coke throughout the country and that there are, in the smoke control areas, on the whole, sufficient supplies of premium fuels as well. Advice to householders on suitable appliances is primarily a matter for the local authority.

asked the Minister of House and Local Government and Minister of Welsh Affairs if he is aware that, notwithstanding the powers of discretion already possessed by local authorities, hardship is still caused to many frontagers who are unable to meet their share of the cost of making up private streets; and whether he will set up a Departmental Committee to investigate the extent of the problem and to make recommendations.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he is aware of the difficulty experienced by many house-owners who are unable to meet the cost of making up private streets owing to the present high cost of such work; and what progress he has made in his examination of the possibility of providing some amelioration of the financial burden falling on such owners.

As a result of an examination of the cases which have recently come before him on appeal, my right hon. Friend has decided to put in hand a broader survey of the working of the arrangements for the making-up of private streets. When this survey is completed we shall consider what further action may be necessary.

May I warmly congratulate the Minister upon having taken that decision? Could my hon. Friend indicate when the Committee might report? I have constituents who derive no degree of benefit from flank road work but are required to pay charges of £700 or £800, when they cannot possibly do so.

What we have done so far has been to carry out examination of the appeals sent to the Ministry, but they give only part of the picture. We shall send to local authorities for further information and when we have it we shall consider an Amendment of the law.

Is my hon. Friend aware that postponement of making up these streets necessitates work being done in some cases at two or three times the price that it would have cost before the war? As there are hundreds of these streets in Norwich and Norfolk, is my hon. Friend aware that his decision will be very much appreciated?

We took that into consideration.

Is not this another addition to the cost of purchasing one's own house? Seeing that the road is used by the community at large, would not the hon. Gentleman arrange for the making-up of the road to be the responsibility of the local authority or of the national Exchequer?

That is a very much wider question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs (1) how many unmade private roads there were in Glamorgan and in the area of Cardiff Rural District Council, respectively, at the end of 1951; how many of these roads are still unmade; and what steps he is taking to avoid further hardship to the people affected by the condition of many of these streets;

(2) if he will take steps to ensure that all unmade private streets in the area of the Cardiff Rural District Council shall be made up and completed together with pavements and footways within the next 12 months; and if he will make a statement.

I have no information about the number of unmade private roads in any area. I think it could be obtained directly from the local authority concerned. I have no power to direct any local authority to carry out private street works, but I am prepared to give the Glamorgan County Council consent to borrow money for making up streets in the Cardiff rural district which are in bad repair, should they wish me to do so.

As my right hon. Friend has announced the new policy with regard to unmade private roads, would not it be of great assistance if he had information about the number of unmade roads in the area of each local authority in the United Kingdom?

It is for the local authority to take the initiative, and, as I have explained to my hon. Friend, I have no power to compel local authorities to take action. Not having that power, it would not be of great assistance to me in carrying out my Departmental duties to collect a lot of information.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what increase he will sanction, and at what cost, in the making-up of private roads and streets in England and Wales, respectively, during the next year; and if he will make a statement.

It is not possible at this stage to say what the extent of the authorisations will be during the coming year, because the initiative rests with the local authorities. They are responsible for formulating proposals.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and the Minister for Welsh Affairs the reasons for the delay in giving loan sanction to Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council for private street works in Parkside Avenue and Woolliscroft Avenue, for which application was made on 19th January, and for Leamington Gardens, for which application was made on 27th January.

There was no delay in dealing with these applications. The council was told on 20th February that loan sanction would be issued.

While thanking the Parliamentary Secretary for the fact that the council received permission yesterday, may I ask why it took a month for the loan sanction to be given? Did not the Ministry send a circular saying that it wanted the council to go ahead with this work? Why should it take four or five weeks for the Minister to give approval?

It took that period because the local authority omitted to give all the information it should have given.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs why it took his Department from 12th December, 1958, to 4th February, 1959, to give loan sanction to the Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council in respect of private street works for Sparch Avenue and Fairfield Avenue.

It was necessary to ask the local authority for additional information, which was received on 6th January. The council was informed on 22nd January that loan sanction would be given.

As the Minister sent an inspector to Newcastle-under-Lyme who went into the whole problem of private street works and inspected many of the private streets, why did the Minister create difficulties by asking unnecessary questions of the council when representatives of the Ministry had been on the spot?

The hon. Member is being unnecessarily churlish. The local authority omitted to give the information it ought to have given and further information was asked for on 22nd December, ten days after the first application was received. Loan sanction was promised 16 days later.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs if he will speed up the sanctioning of loans to local authorities for private street works.

No, Sir.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary himself stop being churlish and have a look into this question? Is not it a fact that repeatedly over many years I have raised with the Department cases of unmade roads and the details have been investigated on several occasions on the spot by Ministry inspectors? Why, therefore, is it necessary to have so many questions and answers between the Ministry and the council? Cannot the Government put any faith in a local authority which knows its own business?

All these applications have to be looked at technically and it often is necessary to ask the local authority for further information. We are dealing with 400 to 500 applications a year and the average time taken to dispose of them is less than one: month.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what consideration he has given to the reissue of the circular which his predecessor sent to local housing authorities in 1956 instructing them that in considering compensation for the demolition under slum clearance orders of premises held under a weekly tenancy local authorities should have regard to what the compensation might be if such tenancies were leasehold.

My hon. Friend is no doubt referring to the advice given in paragraph 6 of Circular 43, which my predecessor sent to local authorities in 1956. This Circular remains in force and local authorities should continue to be guided by it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there have been distressing cases mentioned in the Press at Barking in Essex and Atherstone in Warwickshire? Is he aware that elderly widows have been turned out without compensation at all? It is clear that the terms of the Circular were ignored in those cases. Does not my right hon. Friend think that the attention of such authorities should be drawn again to the existence of the Circular?

This is within the discretionary power of the local authorities, but I will bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said. Meanwhile, his Question will have served to direct attention to the fact that the Circular still operates.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will arrange for a public inquiry into the proposal to fell Buckland Woods, in the Dartmoor National Park.

As the hon. Member is aware, discussions are taking place between the National Parks Commission, the Forestry Commission and my Department, and meanwhile I am not in a position to make a statement.

Will the Minister take account of the fact that there is considerable concern at the proposal to clear-fell Buckland Woods, which are very beautiful and in a National Park, and that it is hoped that he will not support any proposal which would sacrifice beauty to economic expediency?

I know there are strong feelings held about this matter. That is why there was a preliminary discussion between the bodies I mentioned a fortnight ago. I understand that a further meeting is to be held on the site.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will propose an increase in the present grant of £1,000 given to support the publication of Welsh books; and if he will make a statement.

It is not only the publishing of books in Welsh but the buying and reading of them that is important. I have arranged for discussions to be held with the University of Wales Press Board and the Union of Welsh Publishers and Booksellers, but I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Is the Minister aware that certain hon. Members on this side of the House do not fully understand his attitude to the reading of Welsh books? If the grant were increased the price of Welsh books could be reduced and a larger market created among Welsh readers.

The matter is rather more complicated than that. I attach a great deal of importance to this question. I realise how significant it is for the future of the Welsh language which, as a Conservative, I want to help to conserve.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how many books in Welsh have been purchased and read by the Minister for Welsh Affairs?

I find the language a very difficult one to learn.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he is aware that the land at Derby Road, Stanley, in respect of which the Derbyshire County Council refused planning permission for opencast coal working to Messrs. Power (Somercotes) Ltd., is good agricultural land and that the local colliery is threatened with closure; to what extent he took account of these facts in considering the appeal against the council's decision; and why, in view of the high proportion of land in Derbyshire already affected by opencast operations, he allowed the appeal.

This site is 17 acres of rough pasture already affected by past mineral dereliction. After taking account of all available information, my right hon. Friend allowed the appeal because he could see no sufficient objection to opencast working on this land. I am sending to the hon. Member a copy of the letter giving my right hon. Friend's decision.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that the reply given to Derbyshire County Council allowing the appeal was a very dusty one indeed—as dusty as an opencast coal site itself? Having regard to the fact that Derbyshire has already suffered too much in this way, will he think again about the whole matter?

I do not agree that the decision was dusty, either in substance or in terms. All my right hon. Friend had to consider was an appeal against planning refusal and there were simply not sufficient objections on planning grounds to the proposal. The question whether the site should be now worked is a matter for the National Coal Board.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he is now in a position to make a statement concerning his discussions with the Building Societies Association on the discrimination made between men and women applicants for mortgages.

With permission, I will answer this Question and Question No. 29 together.

On a point of order. These two Questions are quite different and I submit, with the greatest respect —I am not being difficult—that you will see, Mr. Speaker, on reflection, that I must withhold my permission to these replies being answered together.

According to previous Rulings, I suggest that the hon. Lady might wait for the Answer, which might conceivably deal with both points, although she does not seem to be of that view at the moment.

You are the only hope of the back bencher in a matter like this, Mr. Speaker. The Answer will not be applicable to both Questions, because the second one raises an entirely different matter from the first. I have a supplementary question which I wish to put on the first Question. If the Questions are answered together, will you allow me to put a supplementary question on each aspect?

The hon. Lady will appreciate that I have not heard the Answer and I have no idea what it is. When I have heard the Answer I will be able to deal with the hon. Lady's point.

Further to that point of order. May I ask what is meant by the preamble used by the Minister, when he asks for permission to answer both Questions together? With the permission of whom?

It is a courteous phrase, to which I have no reason to object. It is reasonable that one should listen to the Answer before one forms one's opinion about it. Mr. Brooke.

I am really not an awkward person, so far as you are concerned, Mr. Speaker, but I do withhold this permission. The Questions are not related at all, so I ask you to allow on this occasion each Question to be answered separately.

I am always ready to please a lady, if I can. I will gladly read out the first paragraph of my Answer, in answer to the hon. Lady's first Question, and the second paragraph in reply to her second Question. The reply to the first Question therefore is:

Representatives of the Building Societies Association have suggested—and I welcome this—that the agreement to be signed by building societies before they may receive Government money should provide that mortgages will be granted under the scheme without distinction of sex. All societies participating in the scheme will be required to sign the same agreement, whether or not they are members of the Building Societies Association.

That sounds very agreeable. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether that is anything different from what we had before? Is he aware that the building societies issued a statement recently which received great publicity, saying that a male guarantor would not be required and had not been required in the past? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that statement is flagrantly untrue? I say that deliberately. Does the right hon. Gentleman not agree that to say that something does not exist which has been proved is not even intelligent? Would the right hon. Gentleman let us know whether he proposes to agree to the Amendment that we put down recently on the Committee stage of the Bill, or whether the Building Societies Association is merely trying, under the cloak of another reply, to get out of committing itself?

No, Sir. I advised the Committee to reject the Amendment, which would make trustee status for building societies dependent on whether or not they ask for male guarantors for women applicants. I have fulfilled the undertaking I gave to the House to have further discussion with the Building Societies Association and, as the result of that, the Association has suggested that the agreement which building societies participating in the scheme shall sign shall provide that mortgages will be granted under the scheme without discrimination Of sex. I thought that was exactly what the hon. Lady wanted.

What will happen to a building society which does not adhere to the undertaking?

I would refer the hon. and learned Member to the terms of the Bill.

The Bill does not mention the scheme or say anything about it. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what will happen to a building society if it does not keep to the undertaking?

That goes beyond the scope of the Question.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs which societies, outside the Building Societies Association, are eligible to participate in the Government loan scheme of mortgage lendings; to what extent conditions applying to members of the Building Societies Association will be relevant in their case; and if he will make a statement.

I cannot say whether a society will be eligible to participate in the scheme until it has been designated by the Chief Registrar of Friendly Societies, under what is now Clause I of the House Purchase and Housing Bill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman prepared to say whether the Halifax Building Society will not be able to take part in this scheme because it does not belong to the Association? Is he aware that I asked this Question because I have had more complaints about the Halifax and its sex discrimination than about any other building society and that the complaints condemn the practice that it is carrying out?

I specified my views during the Committee stage of the Bill. I am not told in advance whether the Halifax or any other particular building society will wish to sign an agreement of the kind indicated. That depends in the first instance obviously on the society.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs what recent guidance or advice he has given to local authorities on the maximum income limits permissible for families occupying or wishing to occupy council housing.

None, Sir. The general management and control of a local authority's houses is, by law, a matter for the authority itself.

Is the Minister aware of the great deal of worry and distress which has been caused among council tenants in Croydon by the policy of that council in threatening to evict families Where the joint income of a man and his wife is more than £20 a week and to refuse new tenancies where the joint income is more than £15 a week? Do not the powers of the Minister extend to giving some guidance to councils to prevent them doing this sort of thing? Is he aware that people who have been in a home for 20 or 30 years may lose it and that there are others who cannot get mortgages or obtain homes otherwise and will be refused permission to go on council estates? Can he discourage local authorities from following crazy and reactionary policies of this kind?

I have frequently expressed my view that the most fruitful approach to this problem is made by local authorities adopting a system of differential rents.

Is not it quite wrong for the policy of any local authority, that of Croydon or any other, to be condemned in this House without seeing how that policy is applied?

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that whatever the merits or demerits of differential rents, they serve the exact opposite of what Croydon is doing, as Croydon Council is turning people out?

I think the wise councils are those which adopt systems of differential rents. I am sorry to find that there are still a considerable number of local authorities which are not enlightened enough to do that.

asked the Minister of Housing and Local Government and Minister for Welsh Affairs whether he will restore housing subsidies for houses built for general need by local authorities in areas where there is severe unemployment amongst building trade workers.

No, Sir, but I am willing to consider requests to build more houses from local authorities in such areas.

Is the right hon. Gentleman willing to consider a request from Newcastle Council, which is disturbed at his cutting down of the allocation of houses? Will he particularly bear in mind the very large number of building trade workers who have been out of work now for some considerable time and who could be usefully employed in building houses for general need?