asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations whether he is now in a position to make a further statement about negotiations with the Maldivian Government.

I would refer my hon. Friend to my Answer to a Question by the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) on 13th April.

Can my hon. Friend say whether he is completely satisfied that the state of negotiations at the moment guarantees complete security to our base on the island?

Our present position on the island is based on the agreement reached in 1956. We are hopeful that the negotiations, which are only suspended, will be resumed, and it is certainly our object that they should be brought to a conclusion satisfactory both to the Maldivian Government and to ourselves as quickly as possible.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will instruct the United Kingdom delegation to the forthcoming Commonwealth Economic Conference to invite the Conference to study plans for the joint Commonwealth approach to the European Common Market.

The meeting of senior economic officials representing Commonwealth Governments, to be held in London starting on 5th May, will exchange views on general trade and economic subjects. They will have available the views of the United Kingdom Government set out by my right hon. Friend the Paymaster-General in his speech on 12th February when he outlined the problems attendant on such an approach.

Would my hon. Friend agree that if we are not able to work out some kind of co-ordinated plan for a Commonwealth approach to the Common Market, there is every reason to think that the Common Market countries will then work out individual deals with the individual members of the Commonwealth, and that the United Kingdom will be left with the worst of all possible worlds? Will he please give this most serious attention?

I do not think that will necessarily happen. When my right hon. Friend pointed out the difficulties to which I referred in my Answer, he also said that he was not ruling out a discussion with the Commonwealth on this matter, and continued:

"The Government do not rule out any suggestions in these circumstances, but they are concerned that the real difficulties involved should be well known "—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 12th February, 1959; Vol. 599, c. 1383 and 1384.]

Will these consultations provide an opportunity for discussing the question of hides, and ascertain whether the Commonwealth countries are prepared either to let us have hides or to do without a preference? There is a great shortage.

The agenda of this conference, which takes place normally each year, is not published, but I have no doubt that many aspects, such as the one the hon. and learned Gentleman has referred to, will be considered at it. I cannot, however, give an undertaking that this subject will be on the agenda.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he has any statement to make about a meeting of high-ranking Commonwealth officials to discuss trade and economic questions.

This meeting will be held in London for three or four days starting on 5th May and will be attended by senior officials representing all Commonwealth Governments. The meeting is part of the continuing process of Commonwealth economic consultation and will provide an occasion for an exchange of views on general trade and economic subjects. The range of subjects discussed will be broadly similar to that covered at the Montreal Conference last year.

Can the Under-Secretary of State say whether, in addition to the discussions arising from the Montreal Conference, an opportunity will be provided to brief the President of the Board of Trade before his forthcoming tour to the Soviet Union?

As I have said in answer to a previous supplementary question, the nature of the agenda for these discussions is never divulged, but the question of trade between the West and the Soviet Union is constantly under consideration.

But the Under-Secretary particularised and said that the discussions would be concerned with matters arising from the Montreal Conference. Since then the Prime Minister has been on a special trip to the Soviet Union and has emphasised the importance of Anglo-Soviet trade. The Commonwealth has a right to express its opinion on this matter and surely this meeting of Commonwealth officials is the right occasion for doing so?

There would be an absolute right on the part of those representing all Commonwealth Governments to raise any subject they wished. The right hon. Gentleman has pointed out the importance of this subject, and it is reasonable to suppose that, if any Commonwealth Government wishes to raise the matter, it will be discussed at that meeting.

asked the Under-Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relations if he will instruct the United Kingdom delegation to the forthcoming Commonwealth Economic Conference to invite the conference to study the plans of Mr. St. Clare Grondona for commodity price stabilisation, details of which have been supplied to him.

Commodity problems were fully discussed at Montreal and Commonwealth policy was set out in the Report of the Conference. United Kingdom officials had available on that occasion some of the material published by Mr. St. Clare Grondona in support of his ideas.

While in no way minimising the immense difficulties of this problem, may I ask my hon. Friend if he would agree that if we could find such a scheme to stabilise commodity prices it would be one of the most effective ways in which this country could aid the Colonial Territories, and that Mr. St. Clare Grondona's ideas are, at the very least, worthy of the most serious study by the Conference?

I can assure my hon. Friend that the views of Mr. St. Clare Grondona were brought to the attention of the Department some months ago and they were given serious study, as indeed have his views which have been set out at intervals over earlier years, but there are very grave difficulties with regard to the application in practice of the proposition to which I think my hon. Friend referred. However, I fully agree that it is of the greatest importance to the primary producing countries of the Commonwealth that we should find some means, if it is possible, of achieving stability. It was agreed at the Montreal Conference that the problems of each commodity in turn would be examined by the countries concerned.

While I appreciate that the Commonwealth Relations Office officials have examined this matter most carefully, may I ask the Under-Secretary if he would agree that there would be advantages in the Commonwealth officials and Ministers as a whole examining Mr. Grondona's proposals?

When my hon. Friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury was asked about this he made it very clear that the views had been considered by the Treasury as well. If any official representing any Commonwealth Government at the Conference wishes to raise these points, it is perfectly open to him to do so.

While I have every sympathy with this gentleman's ideas, may I ask whether the hon. Gentleman is aware that the Labour Party's schemes for bulk purchase achieved much of what is desired in the Question and that if they were reintroduced it would be a very great contribution to the solution of the problem?

If the right hon. Gentleman is suggesting that there is an analogy between the Labour Party's schemes and the ideas of Mr. St. Clare Grondona, I do not think he is suggesting that they would be easily acceptable to the Government of this country.

asked the Minister of Education why he has rejected the proposal of the Devon County Council to include a new secondary modern school at Hartland in the county's school building programme.

I have not included the proposal in the building programmes for 1960–62 because I am not satisfied that this is the best way of providing secondary education for the area. The question is being further discussed locally.

Is the Minister aware of the special circumstances at Hartland? Before taking this decision, which overrules the recommendation of the county council which had the full backing of the rural district council, the parish council, the Hartland School Association and the manager, did any of his officials look at the circumstances on the spot?

There seems to be a difference of opinion locally, because I believe the local education authority took a different view.

Is the Minister aware that the great mass of opinion in Devon, and in Hartland itself, is united on this matter? Did he take into account the social value of a school in a very remote and scattered community? Is he aware that some of the children will be travelling as much as three hours a day by bus if his suggested plan goes through?

Is it not a pity that the hon. Member for Torrington (Mr. Bonham Carter) should have made in this connection remarks in his constituency about Government expenditure calculated to mislead the electorate?

I think the real question is whether there should be a new school at Hartland or expansions in Bideford and Bude, and this is an important matter which will be discussed further locally.

asked the Minister of Education what reply he has sent to the resolution signed by sixty-three parents and members of the community at Whiddon Down objecting to the proposal of the Devon County Council to close Whiddon Down school.

I have acknowledged this objection to the education authority's proposal, and as soon as I have considered the arguments on both sides and reached a decision, I will inform the objectors and the authority.

Will the Minister bear in mind that a considerable sum of money has been spent on the school recently in re-equipping it, that in view of this it would seem a pity to close it down, and that it is a two-teacher school with thirty-five pupils and, therefore, there is much to be said for keeping it open?

I will bear that in mind.

asked the Minister of Education how many new schools have been opened in the West Riding of Yorkshire since 1st January, 1956.

Thirty-five, Sir.

Can my right hon. Friend say how many places were provided in the thirty-five new schools?

Not without notice.

asked the Minister of Education whether he will now make a further statement about the basis of future financial help to be given to Church schools.

I cannot do so yet, but I will make an announcement as soon as possible.

asked the Minister of Education whether, in view of the circular issued by him on 20th March, 1959, he has yet completed his discussions with representatives of the authorities and the teachers on the duties of teachers in connection with the provision of school meals; and if he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. I have asked local education authorities to consider ways of reducing the burden falling on teachers, and I propose to review from time to time the way things are going.

While I appreciate the reply which has been given by the Minister, may I ask him to be good enough to go into the various proposals which have been made to him by teachers who, in many cases, find the burden an extremely heavy one, and ensure that relief is given as speedily as possible?

We are making progress along the lines of the circular.

asked the Minister of Education why he authorised the distribution to 5,000 schools of copies of a Ceremonial Hymn to the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, published by the British Atlantic Committee, together with a message from M. Spaak requesting that the hymn should be sung at school prayers on N.A.T.O. Day, 4th May.

The distribution was made by the British Atlantic Committee on its own responsibility. It first suggested to local education authorities that schools might wish to commemorate the tenth anniversary of N.A.T.O. and offered copies of the two documents if they wished to have them. The Committee neither required nor sought my authority for this.

While I thank the Minister for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that the so-called hymn asks for a divine blessing on N.A.T.O. and includes the words:

"Let N.A.T.O. grow in might,

And put its foes to flight."?

I must point out that this does not involve my responsibility, as I showed in my earlier Answer. Perhaps the hon. Member might like to bring the matter to the attention of the vice-presidents of the British Atlantic Committee, who are, with the other members of the Committee, responsible for the document. I see that the first three are Lord Boothby, Lord Layton and Lord Pakenham.

asked the Minister of Education the prospects of increasing the quota of teachers for Cornwall, in view of the unsatisfactory way it is working there so far as some primary schools are concerned.

None at present. I do not consider that the distribution scheme is bearing unduly hard on this authority.

Will the Minister take into account the Halwin school in my constituency, which is an all-age school with 170 children and only five teachers, including the headmaster, and will he bear in mind that there are eight similar schools in the county? Will he also bear in mind the wide age range in country schools which have pupils of both sexes and will he see whether he can do something better for the county?

I appreciate the problem. We are making progress in this matter. I appreciate very much what the authority is doing.

I apologise for the obscurity of the last part of the Question. The sense would be better if it read:

"to deliver illustrated lectures in schools on the benefits of advertising."

I apologise in advance if my Answer does not precisely meet the altered Question. It is as follows:

Will the Minister look again at the offers which have been made by the Advertising Association to provide in school time lectures, with film strips, for children on the benefits of commercial advertising? If I give him some details privately, will he look into the matter?

Of course I will, but this is primarily a matter for the local authorities and the schools themselves.

Does not the Minister agree that it is not desirable that the school organisation should be used for purposes of this kind?

I would have to consider that matter rather carefully. I believe that the schools get a good deal of benefit from information supplied from a wide variety of sources.

asked the Minister of Education how many hostels there are in England and Wales for maladjusted children.

Forty-three approved by me.

asked the Minister of Education what consideration he has given to the need for a uniform salary scale for wardens of hostels for maladjusted children.

I regard this as a matter for the wardens and their employers.

Does the Minister agree that people engaged on such important work as this should have professional status, and that pay and conditions of service should not be left to the generosity or otherwise of local authorities?

Quite a small number of people are involved, and there would be considerable difficulty in laying down standards in this matter.

asked the Minister of Education if he is aware that the Professional Board of the School of Education of Manchester University has passed a resolution deploring the way in which he has so far ignored the functions of area training organisations in the preparation of detailed proposals for the expansion of training colleges, and expressed its opinion that before any plans were announced regarding the future expansion of teacher training facilities he should consult the appropriate area training organisations; and, in view of the fact that these complaints are justified, whether he will undertake in future to consult such organisations on this matter.

I am aware of this resolution, which was not endorsed by the delegacy of the School of Education. I have not, in fact, ignored the area training organisations in the way suggested in the Question, and I believe the Professional Board would now acknowledge this.

No application under the Exchange Control Act has been made for the sale of this factory.

Is not the hon. Member aware that it is notorious that this potential take-over bid has been under consideration? Is not he aware of the resolution passed by the workers of the Standard Motor Company, who are extremely concerned that they should not be bought and sold without consultation? Is he further aware that their anxiety relates to the whole question of investment, employment and export policy passing out of the control of their company and into overseas hands? Finally, is he aware that if this take-over bid and similar ones succeed, more than half the British motor industry will have fallen into North American hands? Does he consider that to be a good thing?

I could not hope to answer all those supplementary questions. All I would say is that there is no application at present before us and, therefore, there is nothing for the Government to consider within their powers.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has considered the letter, dated 5th April, 1959, from the Aberdeen Branch of the Civil Service Pensioners Alliance (Scotland Branch), sent to him by the hon. and learned Member for Aberdeen, North; what steps he has taken or plans to take to improve the standard of living of these pensioners; and what reply he has made to the submissions made to him by the deputation from this body which he received on 23rd February, 1959.

The hon. and learned Member sent the letter to me on 17th April. In reply I have referred him to the announcement in my right hon. Friend's Budget speech that proposals for legislation to improve public service pensions will be put before the House shortly. The deputation I received on 23rd February was from the Public Service Pensioners' Council, on which the Civil Service Pensioners Alliance is represented. I undertook to draw their representations to the attention of my right hon. Friend, and I did so.

I thank the Minister for his reply, which I received after I had put down the Question, but does he realise that these unfortunate people are caught between Scylla and Charybdis in not only having reduced pensions but also having to face an increased cost of living? In the steps he contemplates taking, will he bear that fact in mind?

Yes, but there is no question of their having reduced pensions. The pensions have been increased twice since 1951. There is no question but that the cost of living has increased since the last Penions (Increase) Act, and it was for that reason that my right hon. Friend made his announcement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has considered the Arts Council Report on Housing the Arts; what assistance he will give towards the three schemes for London for which priority is recommended; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action he proposes to take on the Report of the Arts Council on Housing the Arts in Great Britain.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a further statement on the housing of the arts in Scotland.

Three parts of the Arts Council's Report on Housing the Arts were published on 23rd April, covering London, Scotland and Wales respectively. A further part, covering the rest of the United Kingdom, will be published shortly. My right hon. Friend shares the view of the Arts Council that time should now be allowed for public discussion of the Report as a whole, and has at present no statement to make.

Does not the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that those recommendations in the Report which concerned London were extremely modest, and that the least that can be expected of the Government is that financial assistance will be given towards the implementation of the erection of the three buildings which are proposed?

The important thing now is to list the various recommendations over the country as a whole in order of priority. My right hon. Friend has asked the Arts Council to give him its ideas on that. In addition, it is important that opinion in the country as a whole, and not least provincial opinion, should be ascertained when the next section is available.

Will the hon. and learned Gentleman promise the House that there will be an opportunity for discussion before any action is taken with regard either to this Report or the one on the provinces—which is expected shortly—in view of the controversial nature of the Report on London and also the controversial attitude of the Arts Council regarding opera and other activities?

I know that there are differing views as to priorities in this field, and my right hon. Friend will take account of all the different views put forward—

And will the Arts Council?

—but any Question as to a discussion in this House should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, exercising his powers of approval under Section 8 (2) of the Fees (Increase) Act, 1923, he will ensure that any revenue accruing from the increase of the passport renewal fee is treated as an excess receipt under Section 2 (3) of the Public Accounts and Charges Act, 1891.

No, Sir, because the proceeds of passport fees are already taken as Appropriations in Aid in accordance with a Treasury Minute of 1892.

Is my hon. and learned Friend aware that I had to put down this rather complicated Question in order to ask him for an assurance that the 2d. Stamp Duty on cheques will not be increased on the ground that that Stamp Duty was fixed in 1918, in view of the fact that passport fees were increased because they were said to be unrealistic since they had been fixed in 1931? In view of the danger that the Stamp Duty on cheques will be increased because it was fixed in 1918, may I have an assurance on that score, in the light of the quite idiotic action of the Foreign Office in increasing passport charges?

I answered my hon. Friend's Question, which was related to the treatment in the Estimates of these extra-Exchequer receipts, and I prepared myself with a considerable amount of background knowledge on that aspect. I did not anticipate the supplementary question that my hon. Friend has now asked me, and I am therefore compelled to ask her to put down a Question on the subject.

I cannot.

Will not the Government consider withdrawing altogether from this very stupid decision to raise the cost of passports, in view of the obvious reaction in the House and outside, and also in view of the need to do everything possible to facilitate travel between countries.

No. The merits of the matter were dealt with by my hon. Friend the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs on Friday, admirably and conclusively. The reaction in the country has by no means been universally adverse, and the right hon. Gentleman may have seen the admirable comment in the Economist this week. In effect, it comes to this: there is no reason why those who can afford to travel abroad should be subsidised in this respect by the general body of taxpayers, many of whom cannot afford to go abroad.

On a point of order. In view of the fact that my hon. and learned Friend has invited me to put down a Question, may I ask him if he is aware that the Question I sought to put down on the matter has been refused by the Table? What position am I in now, having been asked by my hon. and learned Friend to put down this Question?

The hon. Lady had better try again.

In view of what the Financial Secretary has just said, can he say whether, when the Joint Under-Secretary of State for Foreigns Affairs said the other day that these funds were being raised because we need revenue, by "we" he meant the Foreign Office or the Exchequer?

The Government always speak with one mind but through various spokesmen.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when deciding with which civilian firms Government contracts are to be placed, what consideration is given to the employment situation in those areas where such work will be carried out; and if he will make a statement on Government policy in this matter.

In the placing of Government contracts preference is given to Development Areas and areas of high unemployment. The list of such areas has recently been revised. It is the Government's policy to continue to operate these arrangements.

I had hoped that this Question might have been answered by the Prime Minister to whom it was originally addressed. May I ask the hon. and learned Gentleman to note that the word in the Question is "employment" and not "unemployment"? Is he aware that shop stewards and, I believe, progressive employers in Coventry are very disturbed about the way in which, because of a contraction in Government orders, skilled machine tool operators are unable to find jobs where they can exercise their skill? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to take up this matter with the Prime Minister? Is he aware that it arose about two years ago in connection with another firm, and that when expansion does come—if ever it does under this Government—these men will not be able to get back into employment which will enable them to exercise their skill?

That supplementary question goes considerably beyond what I understood by the original Question on the Order Paper. Perhaps the hon. Lady will allow me to discuss it with my right hon. Friend.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many applications for loans or grants have now been made under the provisions of the Distribution of Industry (Financial Provisions) Act, 1958; how many have been granted; what sum is involved; and what is the average time taken far the Development Areas Treasury Advisory Committee to reach a decision.

Two hundred and fifty-one firm and eligible applications have been received under this Act of which 38 have so far been granted. The total sum offered as assistance amounts to £1,039,620. The time taken to investigate and reach a decision on each application depends on the nature of the proposals. It may be as short as a month or extend over three or more months.

Can the hon. Gentleman say how many of these applications refer to firms contemplating going to the Isle of Sheppey and whether he has received complaints from any of them about the unreasonable delay in reaching a decision on their applications?

I shall be glad to furnish the hon. Gentleman with information regarding the Isle of Sheppey if he will put down a Question. Some firms feel that the time taken is rather long, but when it is explained to them why investigations have to be so thorough, they usually understand the need for the time taken.

Can the hon. Gentleman state roughly to which areas these thirty-eight approvals relate?

I do not think I could do that off the cuff, but I should be glad to answer a Question if the hon. Gentleman will put one down.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what representations have been made to the United States Government about the reduction of imports into that country of wool and woollen piece goods from Yorkshire;

asked the President of the Board of Trade what further representations he has made to the Government of the United States on the subject of the wool tariff quota, in view of the decision of the United States Government to reduce the quota in 1959, thus discriminating against the British wool textile industry and impeding the expansion of international trade.

I am aware of the hardship caused by this quota, though it is not applied against us in particular. We shall continue to represent the case for British wool exports to the United States Government.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether this matter was referred to by his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister when he was in Washington dealing with the trouble which arose over the electricity contracts? Can it be stated, through diplomatic channels and otherwise, that the one thing the United States Government seem determined to do is to prevent this country from earning its living and that the United States prefer to give us charity rather than opportunities for trade?

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister mentioned trade matters, but the subject of his conversation is confidential. We must remember that our exports to the United States are steadily increasing.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that this wool tariff quota creates one of the worst forms of discrimination and would seem contrary to the policy of increasing international trade which we understand is favoured by the United States? Secondly, on a specific point, as last week the right hon. Gentleman referred to a possible review of the situation on some long-term basis next year, can he say whether representations have been made to get a more satisfactory long-term arrangement and whether he sees any prospect of that being brought about earlier than next year?

"Discrimination" usually means that the arrangements patently are designed to give better opportunities to one country than another. We are of the opinion that this was not the purpose of the United States Government, though it so happens—for reasons which hon. Gentlemen know—that the Japanese get a better chance under this system than we do. We understand that the United States are looking at the long-term situation and we shall continue to press for a change in the system as soon as possible.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this decision affects a section of the wool trade which has been fortunate in having neither unemployment nor short-time working for many years, namely, the fine numbered yarns section, and that the decision will affect that market and will probably cause short-time working in a part of the woollen industry in the West Riding which has never experienced it before? Is it not a shocking state of affairs when they benefit Japan, their ex-enemy, against their ally, Great Britain?

The hon. Gentleman is not quite correct. This is not making the situation any worse. We shall have as much chance this coming year as last year, in fact a little more, in the high-quality cloths; and I am glad to say that at the moment the rate of activity in Yorkshire is somewhat higher than it was a year ago.

Is not it a fact that in the high-quality goods market which has been referred to, the imposition of a tariff does not benefit the manufacturers in the United States, who do not make the kind of cloth which we make in Scotland—and which presumably is made in the West Riding—and that it does a great deal of harm to the good relations between Britain and the United States in the higher grade wool trade?

It has peculiar effects, but we must remember that the quota relates only to 5 per cent. of the United States production, and therefore there is a large proportion of the United States industry left as it was.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is now prepared to give special assistance to the enamel holloware industry to compete with the Hong Kong market.

No, Sir: the value of imports of enamel holloware from Hong Kong was less than £1,000 in the last three years taken together.

Surely the Minister is aware that that is a most misleading Answer, that the damage to this industry is not caused by imports here but by the fact that the Hong Kong industry has taken our markets in Africa; and that the whole basis of the trade is being undermined by much cheaper products? What does the right hon. Gentleman propose to do to help the industry?

The hon. Gentleman is quite right in saying that trade is declining because apparently consumers now prefer plastic or glass or aluminium holloware—

Abroad.

No, in the home market, too. It is also true that the Hong Kong industry, the plastic holloware industry, has come into the overseas market. I cannot help to regain an overseas market which we have lost.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what assistance he is considering giving the leather trade, in view of unemployment in the industry.

None, Sir: the rate of unemployment in the leather industry is under 3 per cent.

Is the President aware that a number of very large and recently re-equipped tanneries have had to close down? Since he has established a precedent in the treatment of the cotton industry, are we to understand that this will apply only where the industry is a large one and not to small industries?

The number of persons previously employed in the tanning industry in Bolton who were out of work last month was 18, of whom 13 were temporarily unemployed. I do not think that the case of the tanning industry is on all fours with the textile industry.

Does the right hon. Gentleman always have to wait until the accident has happened? Is it not quite clear, owing to what has been happening over hides, with the Russians stepping into the market and buying about 70 per cent. of Commonwealth production, that there will be great trouble, even though it has not immediately expressed itself in terms of unemployment? Cannot the right hon. Gentleman, for once, be in front of the gun?

I think that on reflection the hon. Gentleman will see that it would be impossible for the Government to help every industry which said that at some time in the future it thought it would be unemployed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in paying compensation for redundancy in the cotton textile industry, payment will be limited to firms continuing to operate or whether a firm will be able to qualify for assistance if it expects otherwise to have to close down.

It is proposed that all firms in the cotton industry shall be eligible for assistance, whether or not they close down.

I am glad to hear that, but is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of the very best equipped mills have been forced to close partly by their obligations to meet hire-purchase instalments or other payments on new machinery? Does not the plan mean that the best equipped mills could receive no compensation and no help and might have to be closed to make way for worse equipped mills, which will receive the maximum amount of compensation?

All those things will have to be looked at very carefully in detail by the agency, but clearly the best equipped mill is the kind of establishment which will be greatly helped when the surplus capacity is taken out. I think that will make a great difference to its prospects.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that many of us who are anxious to judge fairly whatever proposals the Government have to make are handicapped in doing so because at the moment the proposals have been made—I hope he will forgive me for saying so—in a vague and ambiguous form? Is it his intention to publish a White Paper so that the scheme can be exactly defined and so that we may all begin to understand what it is we are talking about.

There is a written Question down by my hon. Friend the Member for Preston, South (Mr. Green) making the same point as that which the hon. Member has just made. To it I have answered,

"Yes, Sir. I hope to do so before the Whitsun Recess."

Can the Minister give a clearer indication of who is to decide or to take the initiative in deciding which firms are to go into liquidation and to scrap surplus capacity? Is it to be the firms themselves, who may come to the conclusion that, having received some Government finance, they should enter some other industry which is of no vital consequence to the country, or is his own Department to take part in this process of selecting those with surplus capacity, because that is the fundamental basis of any scheme which is to the advantage of the country?

I believe that I made it clear that this is not a compulsory scheme. In other words, no firm will be forced to close unless it cares to do so. The sections of the industry are preparing schemes of contraction for their part of the industry. We have to look at those schemes to see whether they are adequate. In coming to the conclusion as to the amount of contraction which will be done they will have the help of the agency appointed by the Cotton Board.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there has been some misunderstanding because of the misuse of the word "compulsory"? Should we be right to assume that while there will be no compulsion on any firm to close down, as he has just said, the levy will be statutory and compulsory on all mills in the industry? Would that be a correct interpretation of the situation?

Yes. The industry has to finance one-third of the cost of the redundancy scheme, the whole of the cost of compensation of workpeople and three-quarters of the cost of re-equipment. I understand that it wishes to do this by a compulsory levy, for which we shall make provision in the Bill.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will remove the import duty on foreign raw goatskins.

No, Sir. On 16th March an application for the removal of this duty was rejected in order to preserve the Commonwealth preference.

Does not the President of the Board of Trade agree that it is unreasonable to keep this duty on if supplies from the Commonwealth have in fact gone to other countries and are not now available to this country? Why, therefore, will he not agree to remove this duty so that the industry can buy its raw material at less cost from some other source?

The preference margin is of importance to the Commonwealth and it is in fact guaranteed to India, Pakistan and South Africa. We cannot break these guarantees without expecting to pay something very large in exchange, and I do not think it would be a good policy to do so.