asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT an extension of the figures contained in Table 18 of his

Figures of world trade in manufactures in 1938, 1950 and 1955 will be circulated in the OFFICIAL REPORT. Those for certain earlier periods have been estimated unofficially and published in The Manchester School of Economic and Social Studies for September, 1951.

Will the right hon. Gentleman convey to the statistical department and those who prepare the Board of Trade Journal our appreciation of the continuance and improvement of the information provided? Has he seen the publications issued by the G.E.C. and the recent supplement published by Barclays Bank on these matters, and will he consider further improvements in order that greater interest in exports may be stimulated?

I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he says about the statistical work of the Board of Trade. What is done there is extremely good, and it is only too seldom that those concerned are told so in public. We are glad at any time to consider possible improvements.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will invite to a meeting the firms in each industry which are engaged in the manufacture of our principal exports, and ask for their proposals on how to bring about a large increase in exports, the pooling of resources, the formation of central, economic and marketing research for each export industry and the formation of industrial consortia in order to assist in a greatly increased export trade.

The Minister of State, who devotes the greater part of his time to export promotion, is holding a series of meetings with representatives of industries to consider what more can be done by industry and by Government to increase our exports. Whether the specific measures the hon. Member suggests would benefit exports depends on the particular circumstances.

Contained in the Question are certain constructive suggestions. If the President of the Board of Trade cannot accept them, will he consider working out some of his own so that we may make preparations for the great effort which will be required in the struggle for world markets in the future?

I share the hon. Gentleman's concern about the importance of our export trade, but the Minister of State is having a series of meetings with individual industries about export problems. Suggestions of the sort contained in the hon. Gentleman's Question will certainly come up for consideration in the course of discussions.

In the drive for exports, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that it is dangerous to encourage the sale of our exports more cheaply abroad than at home because, in the long run, we lose if we sell too low abroad in order merely to increase exports?

The practice to which my hon. Friend refers sounds very much like dumping, which, of course, is very reprehensible, but I think that in many trades the practice of selling abroad below the home market price is fairly prevalent and it is difficult for us to fail to take part in the same practice, although I quite see the point made by my hon. Friend.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many applications for assistance under the Local Employment Act for development in the North-East have resulted from his circularisation of business firms.

There have been so far sixteen preliminary applications for assistance under the Local Employment Act for development in the North-East. In addition, there have been about 150 inquiries from firms which appear to be interested.

Where does the Board of Trade get the figure of 10,000 jobs in the future recently given to Durham County Council? In my constituency, there has been only one I.D.C. issued since the Local Employment Act was passed, and there are still 2,000 people out of work. When is some of the development likely to take place in the North-East and in my constituency in particular?

If the hon. Gentleman will put that dawn as a Question, I shall be glad to answer on the detail. The general figures we give from the Board of Trade of prospective jobs are based on firm applications for I.D.Cs.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how many of these applications are from firms within the area wishing to expand and how many represent genuine efforts from people outside to come into the area?

Not without notice. With notice, I shall be glad to supply the answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consideration he has given to the joint report of the British Association for the Advancement of Science and the Association of British Chambers of Commerce on the conversion of weights and measures to the decimal system.

I am considering this very interesting report.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the numerous reports which have been issued on this subject over the years, and, in particular, that part of the Hodgson Report which deals with it, suggest that it is now time that some decision should be taken quickly in the interests of trade and of easier teaching in our schools?

These axe exceedingly difficult questions which have been discussed publicly for a century or more. As there have been only a few days since the last report came out, I hope we may be given more time to consider it. These are the sort of things upon which informed public discussion and comment are particularly useful.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that public opinion is very well informed on this matter already, and even better informed than the Government, and does he not agree that the time has now come to introduce the decimal system?

I think the hon. Member is arrogating to himself a greater knowledge of public opinion than I would be prepared to do.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what money is made available to the British Standards Institution for consumer work.

For 1960–61, the British Standards Institution will receive a special grant of £10,000 as a contribution towards the cost of its work for the domestic consumer. In so far as the remaining cost of that work is not covered by subscriptions from Associates of the Consumers' Advisory Council, it will be met from the general resources of the Institution, to which the Government will contribute this year a grant of £160,000.

Does not the Minister think that this is an occasion for expanding and giving a much larger grant to the British Standards Institution for this particular work, because at this time there is a great expansion in the work on consumer standards, and a great deal of knowledge and publicity ought to be put across, and money will be needed for it? Will the right hon. Gentleman consider any further grant that may be needed?

The Government's contribution, in fact, is larger than ever before. I think that, important as the objectives are, one must set some limit to what the Government can do, and hope that contributions will also be forthcoming, as they are, from other sources.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made with regard to grading and accurate labelling of carpets.

I am informed that the British Standards Institution hopes to be able to issue before long an agreed recommendation for the informative labelling of carpets, and that proposals for a grading system are being pursued by the Institution.

May I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply? It is very important, since the breakdown of retail price maintenance, that the grading of carpets should be well and truly understood by the public. I thank my right hon. Friend for his interest in this matter.

I think the B.S.I. is doing a very good job in connection with this, as it is on so many other jobs.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) if he will now consider amending the provisions of the Local Employment Act to enable assistance to be given to small firms which wish to transfer production or expand in areas of high unemployment or possible high unemployment but which are not designated as development districts under the terms of the Act;

(2) if he will now consider amending the provisions of the Local Employment Act to enable those Sections relating to the provision of basic services and improvement of amenities to apply to areas where a high level of unemployment is possible but where the area is not included in the list of development districts.

No, Sir.

Does not the Minister think that, on the basis of his existing experience, it is possible to look very sympathetically at amending legislation where one sees the need for it, without giving what I consider a most contemptible reply to a Question aimed at helping areas that need employment? Does he not also agree that, provided that the small firms are economically sound, he might well at this juncture partly solve the unemployment problem in some of the development areas if he could give this assistance?

If I may now deal with Question No. 10, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he realises that many areas where unemployment is likely to develop, and particularly the older areas, are such that they cannot possibly attract industries in the future unless the basic services that are necessary for those industries are laid down?

I appreciate the hon. Member's concern, but the House has just passed a new Measure in which certain inducements and certain general benefits are available to places that satisfy the criteria in the Section of the Act, and I think that to add to that a whole list of places that do not satisfy those criteria would be completely contrary to the purpose of the House in passing the recent Measure.

Is the President of the Board of Trade quite sure that he has included all the areas which do satisfy these criteria?

That is, of course, an entirely different matter.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the right hon. Gentleman's reply, I beg to give notice that I desire to raise the matter on the Motion for the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will refer to the Monopolies Commission the terms and conditions under which a chemical required by the Atomic Energy Authority and referred to in the Comptroller and Auditor General's Report on the Authority's balance sheet is supplied by the sole manufacturers thereof.

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Education informed the House on 12th May that he understood that the Public Accounts Committee would shortly have the opportunity of hearing evidence on the Comptroller and Auditor General's Report from the Accounting Officer for the Atomic Energy Vote and the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Authority. When the Committee's Report is available, I shall consider whether any action on my part would be appropriate.

Before I put my supplementary question, Mr. Speaker, may I raise with you a point of order and seek your guidance on two points? First of all, as this is the second occasion within a few weeks on which the Minister has hidden behind the skirts of the Public Accounts Committee, would you say whether it is in order for a Minister or any Member of the House to refer to a matter as being before the Public Accounts Committee before the Committee has reported to this House? Secondly, will you say whether or not it is in order for this House to deal immediately with a matter on the basis of a Report made by the Comptroller and Auditor General?

It is probably all right to refer to a matter which is referred to by the Comptroller and Auditor General, because he reports to this House. Whether or no dealing with it by Question and Answer before the Committee has reported is thought to be the best method is another matter. Strictly, I suppose, we cannot indicate in this House any proceedings before the Committee before it has reported. I think there must be some commonsense principle about it in this sense, that if a Minister desires to say to the House, that being his view, that he would rather deal with the matter after the Committee has reported, it is material in that context to say that the matter is before the Committee.

While accepting your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman what further evidence he requires than that provided in the Report fo the Comptroller and Auditor General, in view of the fact that the manufacturers refuse to supply the chemical except on a cost-plus basis, and insisted upon a minimum profit of 17 per cent., rising to 45 per cent., and, in addition— [Interruption.]—it is just as well that these facts should be widely known—and insisted that the cost should include the amortisation of the capital expended on new plant over a period of five years? Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that this matter ought immediately to be referred to the Monopolies Commission in order to show that it is quite improper that a powerful private monopoly should hold up the public interest to ransom in this way?

The answer to the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question is that I am waiting to hear the other side of the case.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the arrangements between his Department and firms receiving assistance under the Distribution of Industry Acts; and whether it is his general policy that a contractual undertaking should be entered into.

It has been and will continue to be the practice that assistance under the Distribution of Industry Acts and under the Local Employment Act is covered by contractual agreements. Agreements under which assistance was given by the Board of Trade or by the Treasury before the coming into force of the Local Employment Act are preserved by the provisions of Section 28 of that Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent, before taking the decision to permit the building by Fords of a new £10 million tractor factory at Basildon, Essex, he consulted with the Minister of Transport on the probable effect of this development on road safety and traffic congestion in Essex and the adjacent parts of England.

This development involves no additional employment: the increased output will be largely exported. There was therefore no need for such consultations.

Does not the President of the Board of Trade think that today —when we have such an appalling number of accidents, resulting in many cases in death, every day on the roads —in any future negotiations for the development of a site, he should consult with the Minister of Transport to see if it is likely to add to the congestion on the roads in that area? Obviously, whether the same number of staff is to be employed or not, congestion is likely to be concentrated round that £10 million factory in that area, and I hope the Minister will agree that this matter should be in the forefront in any negotiations of a similar character that take place in future.

The hon. Member's supplementary question seems to me merely to repeat in other words what is in his original Question, to which I can only give the same answer.

rose—

On a point of order. May I ask you, Mr. Speaker, if you would consider ruling that the Minister was quite wrong, as my choice of words was quite different, and the phrase "forefront of negotiations" does not appear in my Question at all, and I think it is impertinence—

The hon. Member may address points of order to me, but not that sort of thing, which is not a point of order.

I was about to ask the President of the Board of Trade—

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. As you say that I must not address that point of order to you, may I put this to you? The Minister said that I said something which I did not say. Surely I am at liberty to raise the matter with you with a view to fair treatment being extended to both sides of the House?

I do not want to take up time unduly. What did not strike me very much as a point of order was the request that I should rule that the Minister was impertinent. He may or he may not have been, but it did not seem to me to be a point of order.

To return to the substance of the Question, would the right hon. Gentleman agree that, if this development were to lead to a large increase in employment in the Dagenham and Basildon area, it would be an unfortunate use of his powers under the Local Employment Act?

I quite agree. Had that been likely to happen, I certainly would not have agreed to it.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the position is that if the firm is big enough it will get its way, despite anything that the President of the Board of Trade says?

The position is precisely the opposite. I have made it clear on more than one occasion in this House that where a firm wants additional space in order to get greater production from its existing labour force, it would be absolute folly to refuse it and it would not be in the national interest. It is understood that the purpose of the Ford expansion in this area is to increase not the labour force but the productivity of the existing labour force. All development is taking place outside the south of England in terms of employment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the anticipated closure of the Royal Ordnance Factory, Liverpool, by December, 1960, what steps he has taken to ensure the continued use of this well-equipped and easily adaptable factory for other purposes.

Subject to other use by Government Departments and to preemptive rights, the factory will be recommended to suitable firms seeking new production space.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that as much publicity as possible is given to the fact that this factory will close, and will he make certain that it is not left empty following its closure? There are 575 employees over 50 years of age who may not want to leave the area. Will the right hon. Gentleman, therefore, ensure that some use is made of this factory either by another Department or by private enterprise?

Yes, Sir. That is exactly what we are trying to do.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress he has made in his negotiations to expand trade with Japan.

These negotiations are still in progress and I am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that they have been taking a very long time, and may we assume that there is no danger of a further hold-up or suspension of these trading negotiations? Could the right hon. Gentleman say whether some of these difficulties are arising from the fact that Japan is seeking better quotas for those of her exports which are not on open general licence?

This negotiation is designed to increase the facilities for trade on both sides, which means expanding quotas on both sides, among other things. Being that sort of negotiation, it naturally leads to a good deal of fairly tough bargaining, but we have been making progress.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has reached a decision on the application for the removal of the duty on sulphate of ammonia.

I cannot yet say when I shall be in a position to announce a decision on this application.

Can the right hon. Gentleman indicate the reason for the delay?

The reason for it is the importance of hearing in full the opinions of all interested parties.

Would the right hon. Gentleman say what interested party other than the Government has raised any objection to the removal of this duty?

I cannot give details of objections raised in discussions that are taking place in confidence. These tariff applications take a long time, and it is most important that anyone concerned, either as a home producer or as an importer with conflicting interests, should be satisfied before the Government take the decision that he has had a full opportunity of being heard and his argument considered.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the low number of apprenticeships now available to Bishop Auckland school leavers, what steps he is taking to attract to the district firms whose work will offer an increase in the number of apprenticeships available.

Bishop Auckland has been listed as a development district.

That is not a satisfactory Answer. Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that only 23 per cent. of the boy school leavers at Easter were able to get apprenticeships? This is 11 per cent. below the national average, which is sinking. Many of the boys who get jobs do not get satisfactory jobs, and many of them are out of work. Cannot the right hon. Gentleman use the new Act to do something about this?

We are using the new Act to the best of our ability in this district and in other districts. We can do no more at the moment than put Bishop Auckland on the list of development districts. It will be treated like all the other areas where the danger of unemployment is great or where there is an existing high level of unemployment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will invite the Committee on Consumer Protection to consider the methods by which the housewife can best be protected from the offer for sale of perishable foodstuffs whose quality and taste falls below the standards which consumers, today, are entitled to expect; what complaints he has received on this subject; and if he will refer such complaints to the Committee for its consideration.

Any such complaints as the hon. Member for Wood Green (Mrs. Butler) describes are referred to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The Committee on Consumer Protection was given extremely wide terms of reference, and I do not think it right to influence its selection of the topics which merit its consideration.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that consumers are complaining about many of these foods, particularly flavourless vegetables, stale milk and eggs which are not fresh? In view of the importance of balancing the great amount of processed foods in our diet with natural foods which are fresh and of good quality, is not this a consumer interest to which the Molony Committee's attention should be particularly directed?

I agree that this is a very important point. Individual complaints should go to the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. The terms of reference of the Molony Committee certainly cover this matter, and, within its terms of reference, this Committee is willing and anxious to receive views from anyone on any subject. I cannot tell it to look at any specific matter, but I am certain that any responsible representations which it receives on this or an any other subject will be carefully considered.

asked the President of the Board of Trade by what amounts the German and Belgian manufacturers of ammonium sulphate have agreed to raise their exports prices consequent upon the consideration of the application for an anti-dumping duty.

Exporters in both countries have undertaken to increase their export prices to the United Kingdom by £2 10s. per ton.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that this is not altogether satisfactory? We are here concerned with fertilisers which are subsidised. We have had the Monopolies Commission's Report. We are also desirous of getting farming costs down. Will the right hon. Gentleman keep a very careful eye on any development following these agreements?

Yes, Sir. I studied this particular case with great care. There is a clearly established margin of dumping here and the additional increase in price which has been accepted is based upon the dumping margin which has been established.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will refer the organisation of the biscuit manufacturing industry to the Monopolies Commission for study and report.

When I am considering new references to the Monopolies Commission I will bear the hon. Member's suggestion in mind.

I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has read the debate on agriculture yesterday, but will he bear in mind the observations made on both sides of the House that the disparity between the prices of wheat and wheat products is something that should be considered?

I will certainly study the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has now decided about new references to the Monopolies Commission.

I am not yet in a postion to make an announcement about new references to the Monopolies Commission.

Will the President of the Board of Trade put the dangerous newsprint monopoly at the top of his list for investigation? Is it not against the public interest that this vital commodity should be in the iron grip of such a small number of people? Will the right hon. Gentleman get a move on?

If there is a number of people involved, even though a small number, it would be less a matter for the Monopolies Commission than for the Restrictive Practices Court.

In view of the right hon. Gentleman's rather vague answers, can he assure us that he is not in practice winding up the work of the Monopolies Commission?

Most certainly.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state for the years 1954 and 1959, in respect of washing machines and domestic refrigerators, both the value of the goods imported and the ratio of the imports against the exports.

As the Answer contains a number of figures, I am circulating the available information in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

While looking forward to those figures with very great interest, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether they are not very disturbing from the balance of payments point of view? Will not they show that there has been a consistent fall in our exports of these two manufactured products and a systematic increase in the importation of them? Does not this suggest that our export drive is lagging in this regard? Also, do not the figures show a danger of prematurely liberalising our imports without ensuring that there is a sustained export drive?

I do not think that that is very relevant to the question of liberalising imports, but I must agree that our export achievement in this sector recently has been disappointing. I know that the industry is well aware of our feelings in the matter, and it is now making vigorous efforts to try to improve its export record.

Further to that reply, may I draw the right hon. Gentleman's attention to an article in the Westminster Bank Review? Would it not be correct to say that there has been a very marked increase also in the imports of these products? Is the Minister aware that that increase is going on at present and is it not rather disturbing?

It is perfectly true that there has been a big increase recently in the import of manufactured goods generally but the last issue of the National Institute Economic Review showed that a balanced liberalisation generally of trade and manufactured goods has helped this country. The inference from that, of course, is that we should be competitive.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what reply he has sent to the new proposals now put forward by the European Economic Community regarding economic developments in Europe.

Ministers of the E.F.T.A. this week in Lisibon will be considering their attitude towards these proposals, which we expect to receive shortly. So far as the United Kingdom is concerned, I can assure the House that there will be a positive and forthcoming response to any constructive attempt to resolve the present difficulties.

Could the right hon. Gentleman be more specific about "a positive and forthcoming response"? We have heard a great deal about that but have never got down to concrete terms.

Yes, Sir, certainly. The point is that the Seven still regard the Free Trade Area as the best solution for the problems of European economic relations but we know that the Six do not as a whole accept that point of view. We are anxious to know what are the difficulties that they see. Once we know that we can find ways of meeting them, but in present circumstances it is rather like firing into the blue to take initiatives when one does not know what the other people want.

Is it not also the case that the economic and trade difficulties created in Europe have led to the suspension of trade negotiations with Poland and have hindered those with Japan?

No, I do not think that there is any relation whatsoever between these various negotiations.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the importance of the export industry, what guidance he gives to British exporters with regard to the importance of the proper packaging of goods for export, with a view to ensuring their delivery in undamaged condition on arrival at their destination.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for drawing attention to this important matter and I agree with him generally. It is not for the Government to give expert advice in this matter, but exporters have available the excellent services provided by the Institute of Packaging and the Printing and Allied Trades Research Association.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that I have been given an instance of a consignment of fragile goods needed for the construction of a factory in the Middle East arriving in no less than a 72 per cent. damaged condition? Will he draw attention to the services upon which he has remarked at every possible opportunity in the future in view of the endless delay and the general loss of prestige which occur on these occasions?

I would not generalise from a particular instance. I should be grateful for more information on that case.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what financial or other plans he has for the relief of British shipping, as a result of his study of the industry's difficulties.

The current difficulties of the British shipping industry are being studied by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. So far as taxation is concerned, the shipping industry already receives more favourable treatment than any other British industry by virtue of the 40 per cent. investment allowance. I have no plans for further measures at present.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree, first of all, that he and his colleague the Minister of Transport have completely failed to come to an arrangement with either the United States Government or the United States maritime interests. Secondly, is he aware that the investment allowances are of no value to shipowners unless profits are made? Although shipowners, unlike farmers, are not asking for a temporary or permanent subsidy, will the right hon. Gentleman consider, where shipbuilding is urgently required, the possibility of providing loans at low rates of interest?

International arrangements are a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. I understand that the General Council of British Shipping is conducting a survey of the problems of the industry at present and no doubt will be reporting the results to my right hon. Friend. The investment allowance is not only available in cases where profits are earned currently but also where they are likely to be earned in the immediate years to come.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, because of lack of assistance and encouragement, the British shipbuilding industry is in great difficulties about the future and that many people will be out of work in the industry in this country in the next few years unless something really drastic is done in this matter?

Again, I hope that my hon. Friend will address any Questions to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport. I understand that a survey of the problems of the shipbuilding industry is being made at present by the Shipbuilding Advisory Committee.

I am not wishing to quarrel with the right hon. Gentleman about his right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport, but is he aware that the Minister of Transport is a complete failure as far as any improvement in the shipping industry is concerned? While I am not asking for his resignation, it might at any rate be considered.

It does not fall to me to consider, but I might say that I have the highest regard and admiration for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what were the salaries paid to the Chief Inspector of Mines and the Chief Inspector of Factories in 1938; and what are the salaries now current.

In 1938 a scale ranging from £1,450 to £1,650 in both cases; at the present time £4,400 and £3,500 respectively.

In view of the recent legislation and the extra burden and responsibilities placed upon the Chief Inspector of Factories, does not the right hon. Gentleman think that the last figure he gave should be revised upwards and that there should be a similar salary scale for these important people?

I understand that the only common feature between these two types of inspector is the title of Chief Inspector. As for the Chief Inspector of Factories, that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what information he has with regard to the extent to which brewers have reduced the price of sherry and port by the glass over the counter to their customers following his Budget reduction in the heavy wine duties; and how the procedure of the trade in this respect compares with that following the reduction of the Beer Duties in the Budget of 1959.

Retail prices are, of course, matters for the trade, but I understand that where bar prices are controlled by the brewers they have, in general, passed the reductions in the wine duties on to the consumer, as they did the reduction in the Beer Duty last year.

What evidence has the Chancellor of this? Is he aware that the evidence I have is that there has been no reduction at all in the price of port and sherry by the glass over the counter and that the brewers have decided not to pass on the relief given in his Budget?

I have given it in relation to the brewer, but prices in many bars are fixed not by the brewers but by the licensees, who are independent in many cases. The hon. Member will have noted that in my main Answer I said:

"… I understand … they have, in general …"

Having regard to what has happened generally with the price of beer, to which there is also a reference in the Question, and the fact that there is no question of licensees fixing the price of beer because that is fixed by the brewers, may I ask why there is a difficulty about the brewers determining what the price ought to be in this case?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) the principal factors preventing an agreement between the European Economic Community and the European Free Trade Association;

(2) what action he is now taking to initiate discussions between Her Majesty's Government and the Ministers of the European Economic Community towards formulating proposals for an agreement between the six and the seven nations forming the European Economic Community and the European Free Trade Association.

I would refer the right hon. Gentleman to the Answer just given by my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade to the hon. Gentleman the Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond).

It is not possible to assess the relative importance of the different factors until negotiations are held.

I would like to emphasise how much we welcome the proposal that discussions should take place.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that neither the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland (Mr. Grimond) nor I was satisfied with his right hon. Friend's reply? Is he aware that all that his right hon. Friend told us was that a meeting is taking place in Lisbon shortly, but his right hon. Friend has been constantly engaged in meetings in the last year or two and the House is no wiser about the real causes of the differences between the Common Market powers and ourselves and now the Free Trade Area? Will Her Majesty's Government tell us what are these differences, so that if they cannot resolve them perhaps the House may be able to help the Government?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman will agree that it is impossible in terms of Answers to Questions to deal with the complex problems arising in this matter. I am sure that he will be aware also that members of the European Free Trade Association, both in November and in March last, emphasised the desirability of holding a meeting so that we might discover exactly what the reasons were that made it difficult for us to reach an understanding, and their relative importance. That is why we are very glad that it looks now as if there will be a chance of holding these discussions.

As the right hon. Gentleman cannot give a reply in answer to a Question, may I ask whether he would consider the possibility of issuing a White Paper or some other suitable document in order to state specifically what he, at any rate, thinks are the causes of the difficulties?

Since it appears now that some discussions are likely, I think that we had better wait and see how those discussions go. We shall then be in a better position to report to the House on the current situation and the prospects.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that the recent Commonwealth communiqué has wiped out the excuse which we have had so often from the Government that the Commonwealth is opposed to this? Will he bear in mind that there is real disquiet that British industry will be excluded from one of the fastest growing markets in the world and that British agriculture will have a vast surplus which will be unable to reach the Common Market?

No, Sir. I think that there are real difficulties arising from our commitments in connection with Commonwealth trade which persist and will be likely to persist in this matter. They are not, I hope, insurmountable but they are quite formidable difficulties. As for the second part of the supplementary question, I know the anxiety, Which we share, that the United Kingdom should be excluded from the increasing trade in Europe. That is why we have taken the active part we have in working for an association between the two groups.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman, at some convenient time, indicate the borderline of responsibility between himself and the President of the Board of Trade about this matter and in answering questions about it?

It is sometimes difficult to draw borderlines because our joint responsibilities in this matter overlap in many ways—in the financial, economic and trade aspects of this problem.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that luncheon vouchers, issued by firms and subsequently claimed as tax relief by them, are frequently used, not for the purpose of bona fide luncheons, but in exchange for groceries, cigarettes, and other commodities; and what steps he proposes to take to check the abuse of this system of taxation allowances.

I have read reports in the Press both of the misuse of luncheon vouchers and of the efforts of those who organise voucher schemes to stop the misuse. I am keeping the whole question of the taxability of luncheon vouchers under review.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that this concession for luncheon vouchers is generally welcomed and regarded as beneficial? Indeed, the amount might well be increased. Is it not equally desirable that there should not be any abuse of the system?

Yes, I wholly agree with that. It was because I realised that this concession was appreciated and was, as I thought, a sensible one that I decided to continue the extra statutory concession, and, provided that abuse does not become substantial, I shall hope to continue doing that. That is why I am watching the situation.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that there are many bigger expense rackets than this one? If he wants to deal with the bigger anomalies, will he turn his eyes in another direction?

I will take note of what the hon. Member has said, but he has not told me in which direction.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer in view of the fact that hire-purchase debts increased by £31 million in March as compared with £16 million in January and February, and is now 27 per cent. higher than a year ago at £920 million, if he is satisfied that his recent action to check the growth of hire purchase is proving; adequate; and what further action he, contemplates.

It is yet too early to judge the effects of the recent measures.

If the next hire-purchase returns do not show a substantial fall, will my right hon. Friend take really severe action to compel the nation to try to live within its income in this matter?

Perhaps we had better wait and see what the results are of the steps which have already been taken.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Crown Estate Commissioners have communicated to him their plans for the redevelopment of Carlton Gardens, S.W.I; and the nature of the proposals.

The Crown Estate Commissioners have informed me that they are considering a scheme for redevelopment on the sites of Nos. 5, 6 and 7, Carlton Gardens by the erection of a new building to contain offices and flats.

Why is it that a redevelopment in London always seems to involve the demolition of our most attractive buildings? These buildings are part of Nash's great scheme, much of which has already disappeared. Will the right hon. Gentleman use his influence with the Commissioners, who have already shown themselves sensitive to public opinion about the Regent's Park Terraces, to get them to think again?

I agree generally with what the hon. Gentleman has said, but these buildings are not on the list of those which would have been scheduled as being of historic or architectural interest had they not been Crown property. Other buildings in the vicinity are on the list, but not these particular ones.

The drawings of the redevelopment are being submitted to the Fine Art Commission and, after that, to the London County Council as planning authority. The Crown Estate trustees will not take any action until they receive reports from both those bodies.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what communications he has received from Ayr County Council arising from the recommendations of the Radcliffe Report regarding borrowing by local authorities for capital works; and what was the nature of his reply to the county council.

The Council has, on several occasions, made representations in favour of the implementation of these recommendations of the Radcliffe Committee. A full reply was sent on 10th March this year on the lines of what I said on this subject in the debate on 26th November last.

Is the Chancellor aware that this major local authority is very dissatisfied with the nature of his replies, and is completely unanimous in its support of the recommendations of the Radcliffe Report about borrowing by local authorities for capital development? Is he further aware that it feels itself to be very restricted now in its programme for capital works because of the impact of high interest charge on its local rates? Will he, in some measurable time ahead, reconsider this so that local authorities may get some encouragement to go ahead with schemes that have been hanging fire for a long time?

I am aware of the views of the local authority concerned which, I believe, the hon. Member has represented. As he knows, on several occasions I have given reasons to the House for the views I hold in this matter. Broadly, I cannot think it right that, with capital in short supply, local authorities should be insulated from the effects of current interest rates.

asked the Chancellor of of the Exchequer the usual length of time required to clear parcels, which have been sent by air from Europe, through the Customs at London Airport.

Properly documented parcels are normally cleared by the Customs within 24 hours. If the hon. Member has any particular case in mind, I shall be glad to investigate it if he will let me have details.

Is the Chancellor aware that that Answer is rather surprising, as I hear many complaints about delay? I know of a case, of which I will send him details, in which a parcel urgently required for a textile machine, part of which came from Germany, appears to have lain in the Customs, despite repeated requests for it, for some eleven days.

I should be glad to receive details of such a case. I remind the hon. Member, however, that it is unsafe to assume that the responsibility for such delays is necessarily always that of the Customs. It may arise from other causes, but I will certainly look into the case he mentioned.

When the Chancellor says "properly documented", would he cause inquiries to be made as to whether these documents are as simple as they might be? Some are extremely complicated and, in many instances, not really applicable to relatively small importations.

I will look into that. We want these documents to be as simple as possible. When I was in business I looked at shipping documents and they seemed to me to be tremendously complicated, but I was assured that it was essential that this should be so. Naturally, we want these things to be as simple as possible.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware that moneys deposited in this country by foreign nationals resident abroad are subject to Estate Duty in the event of the death of the depositor, even though such death occurs outside the limits of the United Kingdom; and what consideration he has given to an amendment of the law in this matter.

In general, subject to exceptions in favour of certain Government securities and in some cases to the provisions of double tax agreements, Estate Duty is payable on property situated in this country, including money deposited here, regardless of the domicile or place of death of the owner. I have no proposals at present for amendment of the law on this point.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that this situation creates an unnecessary handicap on our balance of payments situation? Further, does he agree that considerable sums of money—particularly from people from the Middle East—are now leaving the sterling area because of this situation and are being deposited either in Swiss francs in Zurich or in dollars in New York? Will he see whether it is possible to change the situation?

I agree with my hon. Friend that those aspects of the problem are very important indeed. I will certainly look into the problem generally with those points in mind. In the meantime, if he has evidence which he could give me which would help in my considerations, I shall be very glad to have it.

Would my right hon. Friend be surprised if I told him that a certain individual from the Middle East deposited as much as £3 million in this country? [HON. MEMBERS: "Why?"] Because of the strength of this country. He then died in the Middle East and this deposit suffered the full Estate Duty. The result of this sort of thing will be that no further money will come from that country.

I should be glad to have details of any cases where my hon. Friend thinks our present action may not be in accordance with the long-term benefit of this country.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the policy of Her Majesty's Government to encourage foreign investment in the United Kingdom, he will now take steps to obtain more accurate information as to the total amount of foreign investment in this country at the present time.

The results of the Board of Trade's first inquiry into direct investment by British companies abroad and by foreign companies in the United Kingdom, will shortly become available. This will give accurate information on foreign investment flows. Information about the total stock of foreign investment in this country could be obtained only by an elaborate census which would not be. justified at present.

In view of the importance' of this matter and the necessity for ensuring that foreign investment is encouraged, while at the same ensuring that it does not reach an amount which would interfere with the economy of the country, can the right hon. Gentleman say whether there is any other method by which he can get a more accurate assessment of the amount of investment in the country?

I think that the hon. Gentleman will agree that the important thing—and this is an important matter which he has raised—is that we should know what the flow is either way and I think this information will enable us to assess the flow. That is the important thing. The Radcliffe Committee considered whether a census of investment would be worth while, but, in view of the amount of work involved, it said that it hesitated to make any positive recommendation.

asked the Prime Minister whether the speech of the Minister for Science to the Royal Institution of Naval Architects on 22nd March regarding the rationalisation of the shipbuilding industry represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

asked the Prime Minister whether the speech of the Minister for Science on 22nd March regarding rationalisation of the shipbuilding industry represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

I have been asked to reply.

My noble Friend made no statement of policy in his speech, but drew attention to a number of questions of concern to the shipbuilding and ship repairing industries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if the Minister for Science did not make any statement of policy he was certainly thought to do so, and, that many people in the North-Bast, and indeed in the whole of the country, thought he was flying a kite, and viewed with concern the statement made to the Royal Institution of Naval Architects? As a matter of fact, many people thought that it was a kind of tolling of the bell for small shipping. In view of the fact that we are deeply concerned about the position of the shipyards as a whole, can we have an assurance that before any reorganisation takes place there will be full agreement between the trade unions and the employers concerned?

I think that the hon. Gentleman has put a wrong interpreta- tion on the position, and so would his hon. Friends put it if they followed the line of the argument he adopted in his supplementary question. Her Majesty's Government are well aware of the difficulties of the industry, but, as we announced on 30th March, we have set up a sub-committee of the Shipbuilding Advisory Committee and the sub-committee has now started its work. I will certainly convey to my right hon. Friends principally concerned the request made by the hon. Gentleman.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the Prime Minister that I, for one, and I imagine many of my hon. Friends, will take an extremely serious view of any proposals for rationalisation of the shipbuilding industry on the lines of Shipbuilding Securities Limited in the inter-war years? Will he bear in mind that the structure of this industry is quite different from that of the aircraft industry and that, if anything, the smaller yards are doing better than the big ones? Finally, with regard to his last reply, will he say whether the Shipbuilding Advisory Committee's sub-committee is to consider any proposal for rationalisation of the shipbuilding industry?

I do not think that the wider fears to which the hon. Gentleman gave expression are likely to be realised. I will investigate the question put by the hon. Gentleman in relation to the terms of reference of the sub-committee so that I can give him an accurate answer, and I shall be glad to do that if he puts down a Question. In relation to his other fears, I hope that what we are doing will indicate that we are aware of the problems of small shipbuilders.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman making rather light of this matter? The Minister for Science is reported to have said that shipbuilding production in the United Kingdom may fall heavily in the next five years. He is also reported to have said that perhaps the future lies with fewer and larger units. What is the position of the Government in this matter? Are they in agreement with the Minister for Science that in fact production is likely to fall heavily in the next few years? If so, what is the Government's policy on this matter? What steps are they taking to deal with the situation?

My noble Friend's speech consisted largely of a number of rather fundamental questions about the future of the shipbuilding industry, a number of which I have before me here, which seem to me to cover the subject and do a public service by attempting, with the aid of the public and with the aid of the House, to elicit answers to fundamental questions affecting one of the more important and major industries. I do not share the anxiety of the right hon. Gentleman. We have appointed a subcommittee of the Shipbuilding Advisory Committee to give us information, and I feel sure that at the right time the House will be informed.

I am not concerned whether the right hon. Gentleman shares my anxiety but whether he shares the anxiety of the Minister for Science. I am not criticising the noble Lord. I think that it is an excellent thing that these frank questions should be asked and frank statements made, but this puts an obligation on the Government to say what their position is in the matter.

It is because we are not frightened of this fundamental problem and are aware of the problems of the shipbuilding industry that we welcome my noble Friend's intervention.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, although the point of view he has expressed today is understood, there are those who are engaged in shipbuilding, ship repairing and shipping, both on the employers' side and on the trade unions' side, who have been anxiously awaiting his reply? Will he bear in mind that, though he may be quite satisfied with the speech of the Minister for Science, it has caused deep concern? Will he please convey that impression to the Minister for Science so that in future he will make it perfectly plain that he is not enunciating Government policy in this matter?

I am not in the least complacent about the shipbuilding industry. Indeed, I recently paid a visit to the North-East to try to examine what was happening. I am satisfied that it is much better to examine the fundamental problems raised by my noble Friend than to ignore them, as was done by the party opposite.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on the conclusion of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference.

asked the Prime Minister what agreement was reached with the Commonwealth Prime Ministers at their recent conference on a Commonwealth policy towards the Common Market.

asked the Prime Minister whether he intends to make a statement in the House on the deliberations and decisions of the Prime Ministers' Commonwealth Conference.

I have been asked to reply.

I would refer to the communiqués issued during and at the end of the meeting.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these conclusions of the Prime Ministers' Conference are of historic importance because they evidently took full account of the resolution passed by this House on 8th April concerning the policy in South Africa? Is he further aware that the final sentence in the statement gave very general satisfaction? The statement said:

"The Ministers emphasised that the Commonwealth itself is a multi-racial association and expressed the need to ensure good relations between all member States and peoples of the Commonwealth."

Would it not be a complete disregard of that resolution of the Prime Ministers if Her Majesty's Government were now to accede to any request by the Union of South Africa to return refugees who sought refuge in Bechuanaland and the other Protectorates?

I think that the last point, although obviously one of vital importance, should not be answered on this occasion, but should be answered on a specific occasion, because its implications are being studied at the moment by my right hon. Friend and myself. In relation to the right hon. Gentleman's reference to the communiqué, I am glad to have his support, and I do not doubt that of many other right hon. and hon. Members, for the general line adopted by the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference. It is at least satisfactory to feel that we have the endorsement of the House in this matter.

As the reference to the Common Market was some vague general observation, and as we were told earlier this afternoon by the President of the Board of Trade that he still does not know the objections of the Six to the Free Trade Area, can the Home Secretary give us any indication that there is a Commonwealth policy towards the very important subject of the Common Market in Europe?

There is a specific reference to this in the communiqué, backing any policy following the principles of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. A reminder of what European countries can do for overseas countries is set out in the communiqué, and I do not think that I can usefully add to it, since it has been agreed by the Prime Ministers of the Commonwealth countries.

Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will confirm or deny the reports that there was a considerable discussion of the promotion of economic development throughout the Commonwealth? As this is of vital importance for the United Kingdom and all the Commonwealth countries, is it not desirable, in addition to the communiqué— which everybody knows is a very thin affair—that the House and country should be informed of what transpired at the Conference, and what is likely to be the policy of the Commonwealth?

The right hon. Gentleman is correct in saying that the Commonwealth Prime Ministers attached importance to the question of overseas development, which is vital to the future of the Commonwealth, and its peoples, but I cannot enlarge upon a communiqué agreed by representatives in the form of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers and the President of Pakistan. I cannot add anything more on my own responsibility.

In view of what the right hon. Gentleman has said about the last part of my Question, will he consult his hon. Friend the Minister of State for Commonwealth Relations about the desirability of making a statement on this subject on Thursday?

Yes. I undertake to consult my noble Friend and my hon. Friend the Minister of State.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that, pending that statement, no action will be taken to send back those who have escaped to other territories?

While not wishing to give a final answer on that matter, I would not have thought that there was a great possibility of such an occurrence within the time suggested by the right hon. Member for Middlesbrough. East (Mr. Marquand).

I should like to ask a question arising out of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' statement. My right hon. Friend the Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) drew attention to the importance of Commonwealth economic development. There is a specific reference to some kind of new initiative. Can the right hon. Gentleman say what intention Her Majesty's Government have of pursuing this matter further? Is it the case that a new so-called Colombo Plan will be developed for Africa? Can we be given some idea how things will proceed in this direction?

I would not like to call it exactly a Colombo Plan, but the Ministers concerned have asked that this matter shall be further studied immediately after their departure, and that it shall be kept alive.

As it is obvious that this was an historic communiqué, in which many subjects of vital importance to the future of the Commonwealth were raised but were not settled by the Conference, can my right hon. Friend enlarge a little upon what sort of follow-up there will be to the Conference, in order to deal with the many tremendous problems created and the tremendous opportunities opened up?