asked the President of the Board of Trade when the new advance factory at Coatbridge is likely to be completed; and if he has found a suitable tenant to occupy it.

It is expected that the structure will be completed in August, 1960. A suitable tenant has not yet been found.

When looking for a suitable tenant, will the Minister bear in mind the need to induce someone who can provide reasonable employment for large numbers, in view of the high unemployment rate?

We will certainly bear that point in mind. At the present moment, unfortunately, we have no one really interested in it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now make a grant to the appropriate local authority towards the removal of the unsightly section of the Monkland Canal, Coatbridge.

The Board of Trade has no power to make a grant for this purpose. I would advise the hon. Member to wait until the Local Employment Bill has become law, when the local authority could approach the Secretary of Stale for Scotland under Section 5 (4) of the new Act.

Whilst thanking the Minister very much indeed for his kind advice, may I draw his attention to the fact that this particular project was approved by his Department in November, 1947, and that, therefore, at this time of day it seems rather strange that it is not a matter for the Board of Trade at all?

Two derelict site projects at Coatbridge have already been approved. Unfortunately, the Monkland Canal, which I agree is an unsightly mess, did not prove to be derelict in the meaning of that word at law, which is why it must await the new Local Employment Bill.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received about the import restrictions on trade with China; what modifications have been made or are intended; what quotas there are for glassware, and what these include; to what extent ceilings have been fixed for the importation of Chinese goods; and whether he will make a full statement on the problems involved in the fixing of ceilings, quotas and the need for a large scale expansion of mutual trade.

As the Answer is a long one and contains a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the Minister of State remember that where he and I were employed we benefited for many years to the extent of millions of pounds worth of orders? Does his recent experience of a visit to China confirm that there is enormous good will towards the people of this country, especially for our technique and skill, and, if so, has not the time arrived when there should be a large-scale expansion of trade?

I am glad to say that trade with China in both directions is expanding.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action it is intended to take to bring about increased trade with China; to what extent China's sterling balances have increased, and whether this permits an increase in United Kingdom exports; how exports of capital goods to China compare, as a percentage, with pre-war exports; and what technical assistance is being provided or has been offered to China.

The services of the Department and of Her Majesty's representative in Peking are available to facilitate increased trade with China. No figures are published of China's sterling balances, but clearly any increase would help China to increase her purchases from the United Kingdom amongst other countries. The value of United Kingdom

Whilst appreciating that reply, may I ask the Minister of State whether he is aware that prior to the war large numbers of Chinese students who were studying technical questions used to visit this country and our men, in return, used to visit China? It was a mutual flow between the two countries. Those of us who have had large numbers of Chinese students working with us remember the enormous good will that it created. Has not the time arrived when that sort of exchange should be renewed?

Yes, Sir, I am aware of what the hon. Gentleman has said, and in part answer to his previous supplementary question I would point out that during my visit to China I particularly reminded the Chinese of our willingness to receive engineering and other students in this country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in granting licences for imports from China, how many new applications have been granted and how many refused in the last six months; and what value of trade has been allowed to new applicants in this period.

I regret that this information could not be obtained without a disproportionate amount of work.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the complaints that are being made from a number of people that new applications for licences for trade with China are being refused on the grounds that they have no past experience and that the quotas allow only for those who have been in the trade already? Will he look into this whole matter, in view of the promise, which he has just confirmed, that the Government are in favour of the maximum expansion of trade with China, because it is extremely frustrating to those who feel that they have some trade they would like to enter?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I have looked into this matter. In any import licensing system one must have regard first to those who have already been in the trade. There have been a large number of applications quite unrelated in size to the level of the trade by the applicant concerned. We look particularly carefully at new applicants for licences for trade in lines which they did not go in for before.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will arrange for the publication of revised versions of Notices to Importers, Nos. 920 and 921, for the benefit of British importers of goods from China.

My right hon. Friend will bear this suggestion in mind. The hon. Member may find it helpful to refer to the list of quotas I am today circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT as part of my Answer to the hon. Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ellis Smith).

I am grateful to the Minister for making an attempt to clear up what was causing a great deal of confusion. Is he aware that as a result of the changes which have come about since 4th November quotas have been supplemented by import licences and that many importers do not know from period to period whether their import licences will be granted? Will he, in the interest of clarification, publish a new statement so that they can understand exactly where they stand?

As I said in my main Answer, we will give careful consideration to the hon. Member's suggestion.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give a list of imports from China subject to quota restrictions in respect of which his Department is rejecting all licence applications from firms unable to give details of past trade.

With permission, I will circulate the list in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will seek the consent of the firms concerned to publish the financial and other terms under which they have recently been induced to go to South Wales, Merseyside and Scotland.

No. Sir.

Why not? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that considerable sums of public money are involved here and that his hon. Friends are repeatedly asking for more control over the spending of public money? Cannot we be assured of their support, and, if we get it over this quite reasonable request, will the hon. Gentleman undertake to reconsider the matter?

No, Sir. It would be quite wrong for the Board of Trade to put itself in a position where it would have to ask firms in receipt of D.A.T.A.C. assistance and other forms of assistance to disclose details of that assistance.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when the revision of British Standard 2049, including new safety standards for oil heaters, may be expected.

I understand that at a meeting yesterday agreement was reached on all the main features of a new British Standard for oil heaters, which will go to the printers almost immediately.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the very great concern felt by everyone in the country, including reputable oil heater manufacturers, about the problem of getting the Standard made a compulsory one as soon as possible? Can he say that all steps will be taken after this afternoon's Bill, which is to be brought in by my hon. Friend the Member for Kidderminster (Mr. Nabarro), to make certain that this Standard is made law at the very first possible moment?

I fully appreciate the concern of my hon. Friend, but, of course, the British Standard has no statutory force. The question of legislation concerning oil heaters would really be a matter for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

Will the hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he is in favour of applying some legislative sanction to whatever it is that the British Standards Institution has now decided to recommend?

As I said, I think that that is really a question for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the estimated cost to the Government and to British industry, respectively, of the official British Trade Fair in Helsinki in 1957.

The British Trade Fair at Helsinki in 1957 was organised by British Overseas Fairs Limited on behalf of the Federation of British Industries. The cost of the official exhibit in the Fair was £12,008. I have no information about the cost to British industry.

Can my hon. Friend assure the House that he takes the best possible political and commercial advice before investment of this magnitude is undertaken?

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is guided by the Exhibitions Advisory Committee, of which I am chairman. It comprises a number of eminent industrialists, whose advice is extremely valuable in these matters.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the value of British exports to Finland in 1958 and 1959, expressed as a percentage of the figure for 1957.

Eighty-six per cent. in 1958 and 101 per cent. in 1959.

Would my hon. Friend agree that the commercial return from this 1957 investment has so far been virtually nil?

No. I do not think one can look at a fair in isolation. There are a number of factors which affect the level of trade between two countries. The fair was valuable in promoting an increased volume of trade.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how soon he expects that the Monopolies Commission will issue their report on the supply of electrical equipment for mechanically propelled land vehicles; what time has been spent by the Commission up to the present time in investigating this matter; and on what date it was first referred to the Commission.

The reference was made to the Commission on the 18th April, 1957, and it has been working on it for just under three years. This is a very complicated inquiry, and it is not yet possible to say when it will be completed.

What useful results have been achieved by this organisation which, according to my hon. Friend's Department, appears to cost £60,000 a year? Can my hon. Friend say, in view of the inordinately long time it takes to produce a report at all, what purpose is served by its continued existence?

That is another question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what arrangements are made for the payment of expenses incurred by witnesses giving evidence to the Monopolies Commission.

Under Section 8 (4) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices (Inquiry and Control) Act, 1948, the Commission has discretion to pay the expenses of any witness required to appear before it. The extent to which the Commission uses its discretion in this matter is for it to decide. I understand that it has not refused to make payments in any case in which it has been asked to do so.

While welcoming that answer, may I ask whether my hon. Friend does not think that businessmen would be much better employed in looking after their businesses than in giving evidence to a body which produces negative results?

That may well be, but the total paid to witnesses has been negligible—only £10 so far.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he intends to include the Durham Exchange area in the list of places eligible for assistance under the Local Employment Bill.

No, Sir. Unemployment in the Durham Exchange area is not high and it is not expected to rise substantially.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the figures are increasing in Durham and will continue to do so in view of the fact that in the near future there is likely to be the closure of a pit and that two coking plants are also to be closed? In view of this change, could he be more generous and include the Durham Exchange area on the list?

The February figures show that there has been a decrease of ·3 per cent. compared with February last year—from 2·9 per cent. to 2·6 per cent. We are aware of the closures of two collieries and are watching the position very carefully.

As this exchange area takes in a good part of my constituency and the hon. Gentleman did pay a fleeting visit to a portion of that area, is he-aware of the alarm expressed locally by the people at the closure of by-product plants and pits in the area? Will he reconsider the position?

We are watching the position. If it appears to us that there is a threat of persistent unemployment —a level at or above 4·5 per cent.—we will immediately take action.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what communication he has received from the Pressed Steel Company, Limited, with regard to the siting of their new extension in the North-East.

We are in discussion with the firm, but discussions have not yet reached the stage at which it is possible for me to make a statement.

When does my hon. Friend think that he will be in a position to make an announcement? Could he give us the exact date, or any date? Without wishing to prejudice the discussions which are undoubtedly going on at present, may I ask if he would make it clear to this firm that it would be very welcome in the North-East, where we have excellent workers and a first class labour relations record?

I am glad to welcome the latter part of that supplementary question. Pressed Steel has visited the North-East and we are in constant touch, but it is for the firm to make an announcement of its plans rather than the Board of Trade.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what arrangements he has made regarding the importation of new potatoes from Cyprus, Malta, and Greece.

My right hon. Friend has made no special arrangements.

Do I understand from that reply that my hon. Friend is not going to make any special arrangements? If that is so, will he endeavour to phase imports so as not to cause a glut in the home market, bearing in mind that last year early potatoes of Ayrshire were practically unsaleable?

Imports of new potatoes are admitted under open general licence between 1st November in one year and 31st August in the next. I see nothing at present which is likely to cause us to change this practice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects the sellers agreement between the British Sulphate of Ammonia Federation, Limited, and its members to be brought before the Restrictive Practices Court.

I understand that the Registrar is not yet in a position to say when this case will be heard by the Restrictive Practices Court.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that this is very urgent, in view of the Monopolies Commission's Report itself, and also the discrepancy between the world price and our domestic price? Can he not take steps to expedite the consideration of this matter?

I agree about the urgency, but it is for the Registrar to decide the order in which proceedings shall be started. I do not think there are any steps we can now take.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what recent consultations officers of his Department have had with firms having large offices in London, with a view to their being assisted under the impending Local Employment Bill to move part or the whole of their offices to areas of high unemployment such as the North-East.

As the hon. Member will be aware from the debates on the Bill both here and in another place, while the Board have no powers to control the building of offices we nevertheless attempt wherever possible to suggest offices might move out of London and other congested areas. I am shortly taking steps to bring the facilities available under the Bill to the attention of a very large number of concerns using office space, and I hope this may have the desirable effect the hon. Member mentions.

Could the hon. Gentleman say how many consultations he has had in 1960 with firms which might be persuaded to move their offices to the North-East and how many firms were involved? Is it not time that the hon. Gentleman took the initiative in persuading firms?

No, I cannot give exact figures, but it might be some consolation to the hon. Member to know that the headquarters of the Management Corporation under the new Local Employment Bill will be in the North-East.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action has been agreed upon to enable the firm of Smith's Delivery Vehicles Ltd. to expand its production on the Team Valley Trading Estate.

The firm is acquiring a site of nine acres on the Team Valley Trading Estate for the purpose of erecting a factory of 120,000 sq. ft. with its own finance.

May I thank my hon. Friend for that announcement and add, as my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle-upon-Tyne, East (Mr. Montgomery) said, how welcome this news will be to the North-East Coast?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for those remarks.

What a change.

I am sure that my hon. Friend will be equally pleased to know that this new factory should result in 200 new jobs in that area.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what further consideration he has given to the placing of Nelson and Colne, and other localities forming part of the North-East Lancashire development area, upon the list of places qualified to receive assistance under the Local Employment Bill.

My right hon. Friend has been keeping a close watch on the employment situation in these localities and is satisfied that in none of them are conditions at present such as would justify the provision of assistance under the terms of the Local Employment Bill.

Would the hon. Gentleman ask his right hon. Friend to look at this matter again as one of extreme urgency? Will he draw his hon. Friends attention to the fact that the figures which I gave on 23rd February were accepted as accurate by the Parliamentary Secretary himself only last night? Is he aware that they show that by 31st March there will be in Nelson and Colne alone a further 2,300 unemployed and an unknown figure for the rest of the area? Is is not the hon. Gentleman's duty under the Bill not to wait for the unemployment to happen before bringing the area within the ambit of the Local Employment Bill but to take steps where such a situation is likely shortly to happen? Will he not look at the matter again, very urgently?

As I equally pointed out in yesterday's debate, in the North-East Lancashire development area there are 4,000 jobs in prospect at the moment.

And there are 3,000 unemployed coming on.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give a list of the firms through which it is hoped to provide 2,000 to 3,000 jobs in South Tyneside East; and what further information he now has about the other prospects of additional employment in the area.

Estimates of jobs in prospect are based on confidential information provided by the firms concerned. I therefore cannot give the hon. Member the list for which he asks.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that these jobs will eventually materialise, and can he say when they will materialise?

I am afraid that I could not say that, but we try to be as accurate as possible in our estimates.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many British firms exhibited British goods for sale in the Pavilion organised by the Federation of British Industries at the Leipzig Fair; how many British business firms were represented as potential purchasers; and what was the total value of business done by British firms at or in connection with the Fair, including purchases as well as sales.

I am informed by the Federation of British Industries that 47 British firms exhibited goods for sale inside the Pavilion and five in the outdoor area immediately adjacent. Thirty-five other British firms exhibited elsewhere in the Fair. I have no information about the number of British firms which sent buyers to the Fair, nor about how much business, whether sales or purchases, was done during the course of the Fair.

Will the Minister say what steps he is taking to ascertain what was the volume of business, which many of us, were informed was very considerable? Does he not consider that it is a real triumph for the Federation of British Industries and for British industries generally to have been able to stage such a show and do a considerable volume of business with a country that does not even exist? Will he further consider whether their efforts might not now be assisted by giving them in Leipzig, at any rate for the period of some future fairs, some consular assistance?

It is not usually possible to obtain for any fair the exact value of the orders booked during the period of the fair, nor should the value of the fair be assessed in terms of orders placed. As regards a consul for Leipzig, that, of course, would be quite out of the question since we do not recognise the East German régime.

The Government had better recognise it, then.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his consultations about the recommendations of the Monopolies Commission on chemical fertilisers will include discussions with Fisons, Limited, on the level of their profits.

Yes, Sir.

Has the Minister noticed that the chairman of Fisons has recently been trying to have it both ways? When the Commission's Report was published he quoted more recent figures than those available to the Commission in order to prove that profitability was down, but when a fortnight later he wanted to impress the shareholders of British Drug Houses he quoted still more recent figures to show that profits had recently been doubled. What action will the hon. Gentleman take to make sure that the public interests are served?

Discussions with Fisons have already begun this month. It would be premature for me to say what the outcome of these talks will be.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what help will be given to local authorities within an area scheduled under the Local Employment Bill to rent or sell factory buildings or land for employment purposes in their industrial estates.

Help under the Local Employment Bill is available to local authorities in development districts for various purposes, but these do not include the sale or leasing of land or buildings.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the local authorities which have acquired industrial estates have increased their own local rate liability by a fair amount? Is he not prepared to notify these local authorities that the 85 per cent. difference between the actual cost of building or the cost of acquisition as against the valuer's assessment could be used by them in negotiating to get industrialists to take over these buildings or land?

No, Sir. Where the local authority itself is providing employment, for example, in building a factory or a harbour for its own purposes, it can apply for assistance; or it can apply for assistance to clear derelict sites, provide basic services, build approach roads and things of that kind. But local authorities are not covered in the way in which the hon. Member indicated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether a committee has yet been appointed to review the problem of extending the summer holiday season; and what are its terms of reference.

Yes, Sir. The Committee, under the chairmanship of a senior member of my Department, will be composed of representatives from the Treasury, Home Office, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Transport, Ministry of Labour and the Scottish Education Department. Representatives of the Welsh Office and of the Government of Northern Ireland will also be associated with the work of the Committee and free to join its deliberations as necessary.

The Committee's terms of reference will be "To consider what action the Government can take to encourage the extension of the summer holiday season in Great Britain in order to relieve congestion at the peak holiday period; to consult the interests concerned; and to make recommendations."

Will my hon. Friend say what facilities will be available to interested parties to make representations to this Committee?

Representations can be made by independent organisations to this official Committee, and of course the British Travel and Holidays Association will be closely associated with the Committee during its entire work.

I may have missed it and I am not complaining, but may I ask whether industry is to be represented on the Committee? In view of the fact that the trade unions are seriously involved, with their millions of members, are they to be represented?

The trade unions can make representations, but this is an official Committee consisting entirely of civil servants.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps have been taken since the Conference on Tourism in May, 1958, to encourage the flow of overseas tourists to this country.

Since the Conference on Tourism the Government have taken a number of steps in several fields designed to promote the flow of overseas visitors to the United Kingdom. The details are necessarily somewhat lengthy and I will, with permission, circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT. All of these measures have a bearing on topics that were discussed at the Conference.

Could the hon. Gentleman pay some attention to the responsibilities of this organisation for the publicity which is presented to potential overseas tourists in this country, which is very old-fashioned and not particularly attractive? Is he aware that there are much better things to offer than vistas of Beefeaters and Guardsmen to foreigners as worth while their investigating in this country? Is he aware that The British countryside is not visited sufficiently by tourists?

This is a matter for the British Travel and Holidays Association. I take it that the hon. Member is referring to its advertising. Perhaps he would like to get in touch with it direct.

That is the hon. Gentleman's job.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the fact that the price to farmers of sulphate of ammonia is considerably higher than prevailing world prices, and that there is an import duty on nitrogenous fertilisers, including sulphate of ammonia, which helps to keep up the price in this country, and that this price is in part paid for by subsidy, whether he will remove the duty on nitrogenous fertilisers and thereby enable the subsidy to be reduced and at the same time enable some competition to be introduced into the fertiliser industry.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to a Question on sulphate of ammonia by the hon. Member for Sunderland, North (Mr. Willey) on 10th March. My right hon. Friend is always ready to consider applications from representative bodies of users for reduction or removal of duty on other nitrogenous fertilisers.

Is it not a farcical position that an industry which is admittedly in a monopoly position should be supported both by a tariff and by a subsidy? Would it not be a practical step, which could be taken immediately, to reduce prices to remove the import duty?

The import duty is under examination, and any question relating to subsidy is for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food.

Is my hon. Friend aware, admitting all the considerations I have just heard, that this industry is extremely well organised today—[An HON. MEMBER: "Too well organised."]—that it is firmly capable of standing up to world competition, and indeed is desirous of doing so, and that on those grounds the import duty could be reconsidered?

All factors are being taken into account.

As the Minister has referred to the reply he gave me, can he tell me when I shall get a satisfactory reply?

Yes, Sir, when the information becomes available.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the numbers employed at the Lurgi plant at Westfield, Fife, are likely to decline from about 750 now to approximately 200 in October, and that within one year there will be 1,100 fewer jobs available in the mining industry in East Fife; and whether, in view of these considerations, he will include Central West Fife on the list of places eligible for aid under the terms of the Local Employment Bill.

My right hon. Friend is aware that the numbers employed on the construction of the Lurgi plant will decline during the year, and that there will be fewer jobs available in the mining industry. On the second part of the Question, I have nothing to add to the reply given to the hon. Member on 23rd February, when I said that a close watch would be kept on the position.

It is not much consolation to the man unemployed that the Minister is going to keep watch on the situation. Will the hon. Gentleman seek to supplement the information he has now got on this area by the information provided in a series of five articles in the Scotsman a fortnight or so ago? Will he further give an indication whether he included in the Third Reading debate on the Local Government Bill the Dunferm-line area in the total Central West Fife area?

If the position in Dun-fermline deteriorates we shall naturally consider adding it to the list. For the purpose of the Bill it includes the employment exchange area.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that he and his right hon. Friend are looking far enough in these cases? We have now had three or four areas on which he is keeping a watch and in which unemployment seems to be likely. He will remember that "imminent" came out of the Bill.

I think that underlines the difficulty. We know when unemployment seems to be likely, but in many of the cases mentioned we also know that alternative employment is available, or shortly will be available.

In England that is where they will be offered employment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is satisfied that the methods of physically scrapping machinery under the Cotton Industry Act, 1959, are effective; and what checks he has to ensure that the broken machinery is not subsequently repaired and put back into operation.

Yes, Sir. It is the Cotton Board's responsibility to ensure that the machinery is rendered permanently unfit for further use and the Board informs me that this requirement is being strictly enforced.

asked the President of the Board of Trade which subjects mentioned in the 1959 Report on the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Acts he has decided to refer to the Monopolies Commission; and, in particular, whether he has yet decided to refer newsprint, brewing. the supply of liquor to public houses, and petrol distribution to the Commission.

My right hon. Friend has not yet reached a decision about new references to the Monopolies Commission, but in considering the matter we will, of course, bear in mind the suggestions recorded in the Commission's Annual Report.

Will the hon. Gentleman also bear in mind that as regards newsprint the community is held to ransom by price-fixing agreements which lead to very large profits on the part of newsprint manufacturers; that as regards the supply of liquor, a few brewers decide what shall or shall not be drunk in thousands of public houses, with no freedom of choice; and that as regards petrol, there has been no free and honest competition for years and years?

I will certainly bear in mind what the hon. Gentlemas has said, but in addition to the references in the original Question there have been suggestions that we might consider referring the following—aluminium semi-manufactures, colour films, wallpaper, cartridges, insulated electric cables—to which we shall give consideration.

In regard to cases which are likely at some future date to come before the Restrictive Practices Court, can my hon. Friend explain how he makes up his mind what to refer to the Monopolies Commission? Can he say anything about that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will reconsider the decision no longer to publish in the Commonwealth and Sterling Area Statistical Abstract detailed tables showing the trade of individual countries analysed by direction and by commodities, in view of the fact that the Direction of International Trade Statistics, published by the United Nations, gives them only in United States dollars and the Year Book of International Trade Statistics is not as up to date as the Statistical Abstract.

No, Sir. We should not be justified in devoting our limited statistical resources to publishing information which is available elsewhere.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this information is not available until later than it used to be when it was published in the "Statistical Abstract"? Can he tell us the extra cost of providing it?

I could not give the extra cost without having notice of that question. I am aware that there is delay this year in the provision of part of the information by the United Nations services concerned, but I do not think there will be in future.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that racks for gramophone records are subject to tax of 50 per cent. whereas cabinets are subject to tax at only 5 per cent.; why a rack is taxed ten times more than a cabinet, having regard to the identity of purpose between the two articles; and whether he will reduce the rate of Purchase Tax on record racks from 50 per cent. to 5 per cent., thus restoring uniformity and equality between record racks and record cabinets.

My hon. Friend appears to be in error. Racks and cabinets designed specifically for the storage of gramophone records are all taxable at the rate of 50 per cent.

No, I am not wrong again. Having regard to my right hon. Friend's reply, and to the fact that I checked this morning with the largest distributor of gramophone record racks in London that he has been collecting tax at 50 per cent. on these articles for the last four years, and as a mistake has obviously been made by Customs and Excise, would not my right hon. Friend undertake to refund the whole of the difference in tax to the people who have been illicitly charged?

No, Sir, the information my hon. Friend gives does not conflict with the Answer to ibis Question which I have given, but racks and cabinets are different things. I hope that my hon. Friend will not harass me to the point where I should express the wish that he should end up on the rack rather than in the Cabinet.

Will my right hon. Friend now undertake to re-examine this matter, as it is perfectly clear that his Department has illicitly collected a large sum in taxes during the last few years? I will send him the information tomorrow morning to enable him to refund the tax.

I will read my hon. Friend's letter tomorow morning, but will he read the reply I have just given?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in view of the influence and incidence of Purchase Tax upon decor, for what reason paints and distempers used for that purpose are free of Purchase Tax, whereas wallpapers, friezes, panels and lincrusta attract Purchase Tax; why this discrimination is occurring against persons who prefer wallpaper to paint or distemper; and whether he will remedy this by abolishing Purchase Tax on all wall coverings.

I would remind my hon. Friend that whereas most wallpaper is used for domestic decoration, most paint is not; and, as regards the last part of the Question, that I cannot anticipate my Budget statement.

Yes, but why does my right hon. Friend allow his own personal idiosyncrasies and whims in matters of decor to obtrude into the Purchase Tax Schedules? Should he not treat all wall coverings with fiscal equity as he treats all floor coverings, including carpets, with fiscal equity? Why does he seek to discriminate and distinguish?

I think there are good reasons for discriminating between one type of decor and another. My hon. Friend has mentioned lincrusta, which I am told is a superimposed decoration on a layer of plaster impregnated with linseed oil on a paper base. I am sure that the decoration of which he is so rightly proud, being a genuine built-in article, does not come under that heading.

Whilst I realise that my right hon. Friend cannot anticipate Ms Budget statement, will he look at the question of Purchase Tax on wallpaper, because it is having a serious effect on the industry?

If my hon. Friend will look at the sale of wallpaper over the past two or three years, he will see that it has been sharply on the upgrade.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many golden sovereigns were minted in 1957, 1958 and 1959, respectively; and what is the policy for disposing of them.

The number of sovereigns minted in the calendar year 1957 was 2,072,000; in 1958, 8,700,000; in 1959, 1,385,368. As to the policy for disposing of these sovereigns, I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave to my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Arundel and Shoreham (Captain Kerby) on 11th March, 1958. Sales of sovereigns may now be made against payment in external sterling or any foreign currency.

Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware of an advertisement in a national newspaper which states:

"1959, 1958 and 1957 gold sovereigns, mint condition, £4 each "?

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware of the "racket" that businessmen on the Continent are buying the sovereigns, bringing them to this country and selling them, using the profits to help pay for their business expenses in Britain? Does not this sort of business destroy the special objective of minting these sovereigns with a view to obtaining foreign currency?

I would be glad if the hon. Member would send me any information he possesses about the practice which he alleges. In the meantime, I should like to make it clear that anyone acquiring gold sovereigns in this country must, under law, hand them over to the authorities.

Is it not a fact that people who collect coins in this country are entitled to buy the sovereigns if they are advertised in this way?

Only if they are collectors' pieces.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is yet in a position to announce details of a further repayment of post-war credits.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has completed his consideration of the repayment of post-war credits to the long-term sick; and whether he will now increase the categories of people to whom post-war credits may be repaid so as to include cases of long-term sickness and other cases of hardship.

I have this matter under examination, but I am not yet able to make a statement.

This is not good enough. Does not the Chancellor agree that during the Budget last year he held out hopes of the possibility of extending the payment of post-war credits in the autumn? Since I am not one of those people who believe that the Chancellor would try for an election advantage on the eve of an election, would he tell us what went wrong so that he was not able to extend payment in the autumn?

I do not think I specifically said "in the autumn". If I did, perhaps the hon. Member will send me the words. I said that I hoped to extend the categories somewhat, and that is my hope; but at this time of year there are certain administrative difficulties to which I must have regard.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether he will publish earlier information on the continued future investment plans of the nationalised industries.

May I point out, Mr. Speaker, that "continued" seems to have crept into my Question in an unnecessary and, possibly, misleading way?

Following the recommendation of the Radcliffe Committee it is intended to publish information about prospective public investment several months earlier than at present—in the summer of the preceding year instead of in the spring of the year to which the figures relate. This will be done in a White Paper, of which the first will be published this summer.

Does this mean that in future we shall have the Government's estimates of public investment at least as soon as we now have from the Government the estimates of investment in private industry?

I think that is so. I am not sure of the exact dates on which the Board of Trade gives the estimates; I believe that two estimates are issued during the year. The effect will be that during the summer there will be issued the figures of the provisionally-approved expenditure for each nationalised industry for the following year. That is to say, the White Paper which is published this summer will give the figures for the year 1961–62.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider making it a condition of public money being lent to private firms that the firms to which it is lent should appoint a Treasury representative to sit on their boards.

Whenever public money is lent to private firms the Government consider all appropriate methods of safeguarding the national interest. I would not expect Government representation on the boards of companies to be desirable or necessary for this purpose save in very exceptional circumstances.

Will the Chancellor of the Exchequer say why insurance companies consider it desirable that they should have representatives on the boards of companies to which they lend money? Does he consider that they are right in doing this? If so, why do not the Government do the same?

The right hon. Gentleman would, I think, agree that it is by no means the general practice of insurance companies to put directors on the boards of companies to which they lend money. I should say that it is exceptional.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer the principles on which the Treasury acts in deciding whether or not to lend money to private firms.

The Government lend money to private firms only in exceptional circumstances and where the public interest justifies it. Such assistance is given in accordance with Parliamentary authority.

Is the Chancellor aware that I am not surprised that he has not been able to answer this Question at all? Is he aware that many of us on this side feel that he has no principles whatever in lending money other than to lend it for importunate widows, particularly if they are well organised and have friends in court?

One of my principles is to lend as little money as I possibly can.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list those classes of matters affecting the administration of grant-aided bodies upon which he is now prepared to answer Questions, despite previous refusals to answer on the ground that they were matters of day-to-day administration by the body concerned.

In general, as regards grants-in-aid borne on Votes accounted for by the Treasury, I am ready to answer Questions about the size of the grants and about any matters which by Statute or otherwise are reserved to the Treasury or require Treasury approval. I am also willing to give factual information about the activities of the body concerned when the facts are available and where this is compatible with the general principle that the administration of a grant-aided body and the way in which it spends its grant are matters for the body concerned and are not the responsibility of the Government.

As there are about 150 grants in aid and as the practice in answering for them varies greatly, and as the largest is that made by the Treasury itself, to the University Grants Committee, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that he might adopt the slightly more liberal attitude announced on 25th February by his right hon. Friend the Leader of the House for the answering of Questions on the nationalised industries?

Will the hon. Gentleman be good enough carefully to read my Answer? If there are any points outside that Answer which he thinks it reasonable that I should be prepared to deal with, I should be glad if he would write to me, in which case I will look into it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, bearing in mind that Ministers receive smaller salaries than those of a large number of civil servants and executives in industry and commerce, he will take steps to alleviate the financial hardship that can occur when they leave office.

No, Sir. I do not think such action would be either feasible or justifiable.

Is the Chancellor satisfied with the present situation, in which Conservative Ministers receive inadequate salaries and have to look to directorships in private industry as their reward when they leave office? While no one doubts the integrity of present Ministers, is this not a constitutionally unhealthy situation, as Ministers frequently have to make decisions weighing the interests of private industry and the public?

It is issues of that kind which arise when one takes on some appointment, but I remind the hon. Gentleman that the thing works the other way. While I would not go so far as to describe the life of Ministers in the words Hobbes used of life—

"Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short"—

there are many cases in which appointees to Ministerial posts accept cuts in emoluments when they accept office, as well as when they leave it.

As I was told that to get the same emoluments after tax to. equal the salary of the Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1938 my right hon. Friend would need £70,000 a year, will he consider increasing the salaries of Ministers?

Yes, but I doubt whether I would go quite as far as my hon. Friend suggests.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the circumstances under which the Bank of England took action which resulted in a sudden depression in the value of Government securities on 24th February.

The fall in the prices of Government securities on 24th February was primarily attributable to the action of those holders who decided on or about that date to make very substantial sales and was of course a natural consequence of such decisions. The Government do not believe that the market ought to be insulated by official action from the effects of decisions by holders of gilt-edged stock to buy or sell, though at times it may be desirable to assist in maintaining orderly market conditions. I am entirely content with the course adopted by the Bank of England in allowing the weight of selling on that occasion to be reflected in a fall in market prices.

If, as appears to have been the ostensible purpose, this withdrawal of Bank of England support was to limit bank advances, why did not the right hon. Gentleman use other of the several methods at his disposal—a direct request to the banks, or the powers given to him under the Bank of England Act, or the power to withdraw special deposits from the banks?

I think that the hon. Member has not quite got this matter in perspective. It was not a withdrawal of support, but only to a support at some lower prices. Support was not completely withdrawn.

Is the Chancellor trying to tell us that the Bank of England behaved in a purely neutral manner on this occasion and showed a behaviour in no way accounted for by a desire slightly to tighten the credit mechanism?

The position, as the hon. Gentleman knows, is that when stock is quoted in rather unusual quantities the authorities very often ease the transition in prices by some support. In this case there was a quite exceptional weight of sales and the extent to which, at any rate the point at which, they supported the market was a rather greater differential than usual. But their practice would depend on the volume of stock which was hanging over the market. It would be quite unreasonable to expect the authorities to buy stock regardless of quantity.

Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my hon. Friend's question about the intentions of the Bank in this matter? Was it intended to tighten credit or not?

It was in line with the Bank's normal practice, except that the amount of stock offered, on top of what the Bank had already bought, was quite exceptional and unusual and, therefore, the differential was larger than usual. It is that rather than any sharp change in policy.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that those with small fixed incomes from securities of this sort are badly affected? Will he not agree that they are not likely to be able to invest in equity shares?

I will, of course. I am always sorry when holders of Government stocks suffer loss. I will certainly bear in mind what my hon. Friend has said.

Can my right hon. Friend say why there was this abnormal weight of sales at this time? Had the abnormality anything to do with the decisions of the Bank of England?

I think that the rather exceptionally large volume of stock offered for sale was due to sales by the banks in order to improve their liquidity in view of the growing demands on them for advances.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what sums have accrued to Her Majesty's Government from taxation, duty levy, or any other charges from the railway undertaking since January, 1948, up to the latest convenient date.

It would be contrary to practice to disclose information about the tax affairs of a particular concern, but if the hon. Member consults the Annual Accounts of the British Transport Commission he will see that it has so far not been liable to Income or Profits Tax.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will appoint a committee, on the pattern of the Guillebaud Committee, to advise whether pensions and superannuation, in respect of individuals for whom Her Majesty's Government have responsibility, are fair in relation to salaries and wages of today.

No, Sir, for the cogent reasons advanced by my right hon. and learned Friend the present Solicitor-General during the proceedings on the Pensions (Increase) Bill on 26th June last year.

Will my right hon. Friend explain why it is that we are always able to examine the position of people in work but never able to examine the position of people who have retired? Can he say whether in the examination of the Guillebaud Committee's recommendations about railway wages, the position of railway superan-nuitants will be studied, since it was impossible to apply the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1959, to them, which was rather bad luck on decent railwaymen who had retired?