I beg to move, in page 12, line 37, to leave out "or caravans".

On a point of order. Do I understand, Mr. Speaker, that because of the time that has been spent in this procedure we shall have additional time after half-past three to make up for it?

The right hon. Gentleman will remember that, under the existing Rules, Private Business may continue until a quarter to three. The time officially appointed for Questions does not begin until a quarter to three.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it possible—I am merely asking for my own information, with the greatest respect to you and to the Chair—that there is any other opportunity which could be taken by those who arrange these matters to deal with Private Business and matters of this kind other than at the beginning of Questions?

If the Rules of the House were altered, it might be so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is satisfied that the changes made in Anglo-Chinese trade regulations some months ago are not hindering the expansion of that trade; and if he will make a statement.

There is no reason why the present import arrangements should hinder expansion of trade with China since about 75 per cent. of our total imports are admitted freely and quotas for the rest allow generally for a substantial expansion of trade. Moreover, we arranged last April for substantial increases in certain quotas and for licences to be issued against quotas on the basis of firm orders placed with Chinese export corporations. It is the Goverlment's policy to encourage trade with China and we shall continue to administer the arrangements as liberally as possible consistently with national interest. Imports and exports in the first five months of this year were much greater than last year.

May I ask my right hon. Friend two questions? First, can he assure the House that there has been no pressure from American sources to reduce this trade? Secondly, can he say what the main reasons are why the trade has not expanded even more than it has done recently?

There is certainly no pressure from American sources to alter our policy. I thought that the trade was expanding very satisfactorily. Speaking from memory, the main difficulty is, on the whole, the shortage of sterling in Chinese hands.

Is it not the case that, were it not for the agreement on restrictions of last November, Chinese trade would today have been greater than it is?

The restrictions on Chinese trade are precisely the same as the restrictions on other State-trading countries. I am sure they are necessary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the potential damage to United Kingdom export trade in scientific instruments through failure to keep up with developments in importing countries; if he will, accordingly, ask the Scientific Instrument Manufacturers of Great Britain to make a report to him on their recent exhibition in Moscow, and especially for their expert opinion as to how scientific instrument manufacturing in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics compares with that of Great Britain; if he will publish their report; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir; United Kingdom exports of scientific instruments have risen steadily in recent years. The Moscow Exhibition was a great success and the Russians showed interest in buying many types of British equipment. As I said in answer to my hon. Friend on 7th July, the manufacturers who exhibited in Moscow will be discussing their experiences with officials.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that both The Times and the Daily Telegraph reported that our exhibitors in Moscow were absolutely "flabbergasted" at the quality of the Russian products, which made it, of course, awkward for them to sell what we are producing? Cannot he get some report from them so that both workers and managements may be shown that they must pull up their socks in order to catch up with the Russians?

I cannot accept my hon. Friend's view in this matter. I agree that Russian progress in this field is very considerable, but our people are doing pretty well too. Between 90 and 95 per cent. of the equipment shown in the exhibition was sold.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will arrange for figures relating to the import and export of the natural insecticide, pyrethrum extract, to be published as separate items in the United Kingdom Monthly Trade and Navigation Accounts, now that the import of pyrethrum into the United Kingdom is about £500,000 annually and constitutes a relatively important part of inter-Commonwealth trade, and in view of the fact that other import and export items of a much smaller value are included in the Accounts.

I will consider this suggestion though it is too late for consideration for the 1961 Accounts.

Is the President aware that there are a number of chemical products in the same division of which the imports are very much less which are itemised separately, and that this happens to be a particularly important export of Kenya and one which is growing?

I think there is a strong case for including this in the statistics. I will look into the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what estimate he has made of the full effect of the proposed increase in the importation of Japanese radio receivers upon industry in the United Kingdom; if he will take steps to see that the industry is not depressed as a result of such an action; and if he will make a statement of his intentions in the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the difficulties facing the radio industry of the United Kingdom resulting from the re-imposition of hire-purchase and credit controls, if he wild ensure, during the Anglo-Japanese trade talks, that there shall be no substantial increase in the import quota of low-priced Japanese transistor radios produced by low-paid labour.

I have agreed to increase the quota for transistorised radios to be imported from Japan to £200,000. In addition, I am instituting a quota of £100,000 for the import of Japanese non-transistorised radio and television sets and a quota of £100,000 for the import of Japanese non-transistorised radio gramophones and gramophones.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the alarm which exists in the country about the prospect of this agreement? Does it not mean that there will be on the home market large quantities of Japanese transistor radio sets at a time when the home industry, as a result of recent Government restrictions, is having to cut back its sales? Is he aware that a radio factory in Spennymoor has had plans for future development, but owing to this agreement and the restrictions which the Government have already imposed it is very doubtful whether that development can be carried out? Is there any sense in the Government's talking about expansion of industry when at the same time they do such things as this, which make it more difficult for British firms to sell the goods which they manufacture? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that the agreement will not have disastrous effects on the home industry?

I do not agree that there is any cause for alarm. The quota is £200,000, and the latest figure that I have for the sales, of home-produced sets is more like £7 million. If we expect to sell our manufactured goods abroad, we must be prepared to allow imparts. I think that, on balance, the agreement with Japan will mean a useful increase in trade in both directions.

Is it not regrettable that the quota should be increased tenfold at a time when Government action is hitting the radio industry? Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that Japanese components have been imported in Austrian and Italian sets? Is it not a fact that, as a result of the Eire Government's favourable terms to a Japanese subsidiary, we are likely to get more of these goods from the free port of Shannon? Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the main component of these transistors is not the raw material but the labour? They have a high labour content. Is he aware that the Japanese workers are getting only 1s.—1s. 6d. an hour compared with 6s. per hour in this country? What chance have we got? When will this sort of thing be happening with television sets?

The increase in the import of Japanese radios is extremely modest. On the other hand, as a result of the agreement we shall sell in Japan, I am sure, greatly increased quantities of such items as machine tools and woollen cloth, and that is a very good thing for British trade.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what are Her Majesty's Government's plans for the future commercial development of Hovercraft for carrying passengers and freight, respectively.

The commercial development of Hovercraft is the responsibility of Hovercraft Development Ltd. This Company, which is financed by the National Research and Development Corporation under the Development of Inventions Act, 1948, has so far issued two statements about its plans for collaboration with industry.

That answer tells us very little indeed. Does not the hon. Gentleman appreciate that there are large numbers of the general public and a considerable number of my own constituents being asked to manufacture the machines who really want to know whether the Government think that it has a future or not as a means of transportation? Can the hon. Gentleman say whether at any stage the Government will give their views about the future or otherwise of the Hovercraft?

The fact that Hovercraft Development Limited recently announced arrangements with Vickers and Westland to produce operational prototypes which will be larger and more advanced than the existing S.R.N.1, which was demonstrated on the river outside the House, shows that it thinks that there is a commercial future for this vehicle.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made by the interdepartmental committee reviewing the problems of extending the summer holiday season; and when he expects to receive its report.

As my right hon. Friend explained to his hon. Friend the Member for Honiton (Mr. Mathew) on 14th July, the Committee on the Extension of the Holiday Season has met six times since its appointment last March and hopes to present an interim Report by October.

As none of the problems before this Committee is new, will my hon. Friend undertake to ask it to expedite its final findings so that we can have action before the next holiday season?

I cannot quite agree with my hon. Friend. There is need, I think, for reliable information about the choice of holiday dates, and Social Survey is undertaking now a sample survey to elicit information about why people take their holidays when they do. Preliminary results from this cannot be made available before the middle of September.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the House has been discussing this problem for more than 22 years?

I am well aware that the subject has been discussed for a long time, but it is very important that adequate consultations should be undertaken with all those concerned in order to ensure the widest measure of support for the Committee's recommendations when it makes them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what in the number of production engineers employed in the Scottish Region of his Department for the purpose of assessing the production capacities of the different branches of Scottish industry.

None, Sir.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think that if there were some people in Scotland who could advise Scottish firms about the production capabilities of other Scottish firms it might be possible for us to step up production in Scotland much more than we have succeeded in doing? Will he look at the question? Is it not very bad that the Board of Trade has no one in Scotland who can give such advice?

I will certainly look into the point, but the staff of the Office for Scotland give advice about the production capacity of Scottish industry. We do not consider it necessary to employ production engineers for this purpose. The information can usually be obtained from the Office for Scotland or any of the other appropriate regional offices.

Was not the Scottish Regional Office equipped with those engineering personnel during the war and immediate post-war period? Was it not seen to be a great advantage? If so, would it not be an advantage to have such people now?

Perhaps the hon. Member might like to put down that question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what number of civil servants of the senior executive grade, and upwards, are employed in the Scottish Region of his Department.

Six, including the Secretary of the Regional Board for Industry.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary consider that there are enough of these people in Scotland, particularly in view of the fact that his Department recently wrongly advised my hon. Friend the Member for Bothwell (Mr. Timmons) and myself about who was occupying the naval stores at Carfin? This indicates that the hon. Gentleman's Department does not have much knowledge of what is going on in Scotland. Will not the hon. Gentleman examine this number to see whether there are enough people to do the job which they are supposed to be doing in Scotland?

We have no evidence whatever that extra staff is required, but naturally I will look into the point which the hon. Member has raised.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what estimate he has made of the effect of the cut-back of the nuclear power programme on subsidiary producers of the relevant industrial components.

The suppliers of ancillary equipment for nuclear power stations are so numerous and the pro ducts in question are so diverse that it would be impracticable to make any such estimate.

I am sorry that the Parliamentary Secretary did not detect a constituency interest in the Question. Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that Vickers Armstrong (South Marston) Limited have now gone out of aircraft and into this line of business and are anxious about the possible effects of the cut-back on their work? Swindon faces a difficult problem for the future in this matter. Will the hon. Gentleman examine it in that light and write to me with further information?

Rephasing of the programme will, naturally, have some effect on the volume of orders obtained by some of the ancillary suppliers. Most of them, however, have many other outlets for their equipment and there is no reason to expect a severe effect on their business as a whole. A lot of firms concerned are very busy indeed. I will, however, certainly look into the individual case that the hon. Member has raised.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why the covering letter accompanying the questionnaire issued by him in connection with the fact-finding inquiry into resale price maintenance states that the Board is already fully aware of the general arguments for and against resale price maintenance, when specific questions contained in the questionnaire ask manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers to indicate what, from their point of view, are the advantages or disadvantages of fixed prices; and whether he will take steps to correct the misunderstandings which may arise from this contradiction.

The distinction intended is between arguments of a general nature, which have already been exhaustively canvassed, and the specific considerations which lead the individual firm in the circumstances of its particular industry or trade to adopt or refrain from adopting resale price maintenance.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in respect of particular items the retail trade is left in great doubt, because his columnar treatment allows of four possibilities whereas, in fact, there is a fifth possibility—that the prices are neither fixed nor suggested? Therefore, leaving it blank gives room for doubt, because either the goods are not supplied or, if they are supplied, their price is neither fixed nor suggested. I know that this is a matter which is causing difficulty and I am wondering whether my hon. Friend is aware of this.

Naturally, in an exercise of this nature, there is scope for disagreement about the questions which might have been asked. I will, however, look into the point which my hon. Friend has raised, although I should point out that the questions which we included in the questionnaire followed consultation with a great many trade organisations.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will place a copy in the Library of the questionnaire which he is sending out to wholesalers, manufacturers and retailers in connection with his fact-finding inquiry into resale price maintenance; and what steps he has taken to satisfy himself that the questionnaire which has been drafted for retailers is suitable for the average small retailer in this country and will be understood by him.

My right hon. Friend is arranging to put a copy of the three questionnaires in the Library. With regard to the latter part of the Question, careful consideration was given to the problem of drafting the questionnaire in a form which would both make it readily intelligible and produce the kind of information which we are seeking.

Is my hon. Friend aware that hon. Members will be grateful to be able to see the questionnaire, because it has been suggested to some of us that it is a difficult and comprehensive questionnaire for the average small shopkeeper to answer?

The National Chambers of Trade, the Proprietary Articles Trade Association, the Federation of British Industries and other trade bodies were specifically asked whether the questions would be understood and answered by large and small traders. They considered that the questions would be easily intel- ligible. I hope that my hon. Friend does not underestimate the intelligence of the retailers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether his questionnaire in connection with resale price maintenance has now been distributed to all persons to whom it is intended it should go; what has been the method of selecting the recipients; what is the latest date by which the information has to reach his Department; and when he expects to announce the result.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many questionnaires he is distributing in connection with his fact-finding inquiry about resale price maintenance; how many will go, respectively, to manufacturers, wholesalers, and retailers; through what channels they will be distributed; and what arrangements are being made to inform individuals who do not receive a copy of the questionnaire how they can get one if they wish to do so.

The questionnaire should by now be in the hands of most of those intended to receive them. Nearly 8,000 have been distributed in all, some 6,000 to retailers, the balance being divided between wholesalers and manufacturers. A number of representative trade organisations have assisted by distributing copies to wholesalers and to retailers, and my right hon. Friend is glad of this opportunity of acknowledging their help; manufacturers have received copies directly from the Board. In all cases attention has been paid to securing coverage of firms of all sizes, and in all regions, concerned with almost all types of goods. A notice has been published in the Board of Trade Journal, informing interested persons that they can obtain a questionnaire if they so wish. The final date for return is 17th September, 1960, but I am not yet in a position to say when the inquiry will be completed.

While thanking the Parliamentary Secretary for his reply, may I ask him whether he will see to it that when the returns are received there will be no undue delay in the matter, since it is, of course, a very important one?

Certainly I agree that speed is very important.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) why he is allowing imported electrical goods into this country, since such permission adversely affects the home market and deprives United Kingdom workers of jobs;

It is our policy to use the tariff as the normal means of protection and to remove our remaining import restrictions as soon as we can.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that, apart from what he had to say in reply to Question No. 9 by my hon. Friend the Member for Durham (Mr. Grey), there is no justification whatever for allowing these Japanese radio sets to be imported in this way and thus deprive many of our people of work? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the electrical industry offers the prospect of increased employment for many of our young people on leaving school? Is he further aware—[HON. MEMBERS: "Speech."] Hon. Members ought to realise that I have asked two Questions. Is the President of the Board of Trade further aware that juvenile unemployment in Durham county has gone up by no less than 25 per cent. over the last month? What is to be done about this?

The policy of relying on the tariff to protect our industry is an inherent part of our membership of G.A.T.T., which has been the agreed policy of both sides of the House for a long while. The tariff on foreign electrical goods varies from 10 to 33 per cent., which seems to me a fairly reasonable level of tariff protection. If we do not let electrical goods come in, we cannot, of course, expect to export them. Last year, whereas we imported £40 million worth, our exports totalled £231 million.

Does not the President of the Board of Trade agree that, in view of the high incidence of unemployment in various parts of the country, every positive step should be taken to safe guard the employment of our people in those areas which depend upon the productive capacity of employment of this nature?

To try to protect our industries by imposing quotas contrary to the rules of G.A.T.T. would, in the long run, do more harm to our trade than good.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will refer the telephone equipment manufacturing industry to the Monopolies Commission.

My right hon. Friend will bear my hon. Friend's suggestion in mind when considering new references to the Monopolies Commission. Before considering such a reference, however, my right hon. Friend would have to be satisfied that the conditions to which the Act applies prevail in the industry.

Will my hon. Friend seriously consider either referring this industry to the Monopolies Commission or referring the agreement to the Restrictive Trade Practices Court, because there seems to be a feeling that this electrical telephone manufacturers' ring of seven firms is producing goods worth £75 million a year and selling them all to one customer—namely, the Post Office—and that their agreement is of such a nature that it would normally be taken before the Restrictive Trade Practices Court?

We are, of course, aware of the facts which my hon. Friend has mentioned, but the conditions to which the Monopolies and Restrictive Practices Act applies prevail if at least one-third of the goods in question

"which are supplied in the United Kingdom or any substantial part thereof are supplied by or to any one person."

Is the Parliamentary Secretary not aware of the financial battle that is going on in the City these days to get into this 'monopoly? Is he not equally aware that the Post Office is in a stranglehold by this monopoly? Is he not further aware that this matter should be thoroughly investigated so that we might see whether we should take steps to end this arrangement and to give the Post Office a bit of freedom and the customer better value?

I am aware that Pye, Ltd., is attempting to buy control of the Telephone Manufacturing Company. The other part of the question which the right hon. Gentleman mentioned is a matter more for my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General than for me.

We want to be assured that either the Monopolies Commission or the Restrictive Practices Court is able to deal with this subject and that there is no danger of the matter slipping between the two, thus exposing a dangerous gap in the Government's legislation for dealing with restrictive practices. May we have that assurance?

There is no danger of that. We are considering——

One or other of them?

Not necessarily one or the other, but the points that have been raised in question and answer today.

Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that a Government Department is being held to ransom in this matter? Here is a tightly bound monopoly. The Post Office is completely at its mercy and has some £60 million a year involved. Surely, this is an extraordinary case that should be referred to the Commission.

I cannot accept that the Post Office is being held to ransom.

Of course it is.

It is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General, who would take steps if he felt that that was so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the concern in the Channel Islands regarding the long delays which occur in the delivery there of exports from the United Kingdom; and whether he will use his good offices to overcome these difficulties.

I am not aware of any delays in deliveries to the Channel Islands. If my hon. Friend is referring to shipping delays, he may wish to put a Question to my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if his attention has been drawn to the recent recommendations of the Law Reform Society for Scotland that the existing law of security on moveables should be amended; if he is aware that such recommendation can be effected by amendment of the Companies Act, 1948; and what action he proposes to take.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend is considering with his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland how the matter can best be handled.

Is my hon. Friend aware that on Tuesday last week his right hon. Friend was singing the virtues of the Scottish people investing in Scottish industry, and is he further aware that in this unanimous report it is stated that the present law of security on moveables does constitute a barrier to such investment? Will my hon. Friend give most urgent consideration to the amendment of the law as speedily as possible?

One of the points being discussed with the Scottish Office is whether the implementation of the recommendations could most appropriately be achieved by amending the Companies Act. That, I think, will cover my hon. Friend's supplementary question.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this matter has been under consideration now for many years and before it was before the Law Reform Committee? One of the main examples shown in this report, namely, that relating to the fishing industry of Aberdeen, absolutely proves the fact that a great part of Scottish industry now is under a definite disadvantage compared with English industry owing to the law. Therefore, can my hon. Friend not give an assurance that some provision will be introduced definitely to deal with the point early in the next Session?

The report was published only on 28th June, and have said that my right hon. Friend is already in consultation with the Secretary of State for Scotland on this matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade where, when, and in what industries, the 1,000 jobs promised for South Durham will accrue.

The estimate of 1,000 new jobs in South Durham which my right hon. Friend gave the hon. Member on 30th June related to the employment exchange areas of Darlington and Barnard Castle, excluding Darlington County Borough. Most of these new jobs are expected to arise on the Aycliffe Trading Estate. They cover a variety of industries and will arise at varying times.

In view of the continuing and persistent unemployment in this area and the very unsatisfactory nature of the Answer, would the Parliamentary Secretary consider building at least one factory in advance of demand either in Barnard Castle rural district at Even-wood, or Shildon or West Auckland, where the local authorities are just bursting to help the Board of Trade if only it will do something for us?

I cannot agree about the unsatisfactory nature of that Answer, since it merely gives the facts. The facts may be unsatisfactory, but the Answer need not necessarily be. The whole question of advance factories is one which is one under consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what increase there has been in the quantity of frozen peas imported from the United States of America since the lifting of the restrictions On imports from dollar countries, up to the most recent convenient date.

The restriction on these imports from the dollar area was lifted on 8th June, 1959, but figures are not available prior to 1960. Imports from the U.S.A. during the period January-May, 1960, were 40,648 cwts.

It seems that this must be an increase almost from nil, because I imagine that previously it was very small. Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that this industry of the freezing and processing of vegetables is a very important one for employment both on the farms and in the towns, particularly in eastern England, and will he look again at the case for tariff change in connection with these imports, having rejected the case put forward last year?

An application for an increased import duty was rejected in March this year. If since March there has been a change in the situation extensive enough to make a marked change in it, certainly we will look at a renewed application.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that over the post-war years East Anglia has been responsible for the production of a very considerable tonnage of peas, some of which have been dried and sold as frozen vegetables, and that the policy of the Government seems to be interpreted in the area as one of squeezing out the home producers? Will he please stop that?

I think that would be a bad interpretation. I will certainly bear in mind the interests of East Anglia. I know that if I did not even for a moment my hon. and gallant Friend would see that I did.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in the work of distributing industry and stimulating enterprise in the areas of Scotland and elsewhere which are losing population and to prevent the overgrowth of the areas of industrial attraction, the Government will consider the use of methods of tax holiday, grants and loans now being used to develop industry in Malta.

My hon. Friend is satisfied that the powers given to the Department under the Local Employment Act and the Town and Country Planning Acts are sufficient for the purpose.

Are the hon. Gentleman's right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and also the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whom I see present, aware that these powers do not work in great parts of Scotland and that so far none of the powers has ever worked in getting industry into those areas? Are they aware that the Colonial Secretary has now devised a most interesting scheme for taking industry to Malta, and will they not see that Scotland has at least most-favoured-nation treatment in this respect? What is good enough for Malta should be used, if necessary, for both the North-East Coast and Scotland in order to get new industry there.

I cannot agree that the Local Employment Act has not produced new industry in Scotland. [HON. MEMBERS: "Where in Scotland?"] Perhaps it has not produced enough, but we are certainly producing new industry. The analogy with Malta is misleading. It is one thing to have tax advantages or similar discriminatory inducements covering a whole area; it is another thing to have discriminatory inducements operating only in certain places. Just imagine the difficulty of assessing tax of a firm which is based in different places—such as B.M.C. in Scotland and in the Midlands.

Would not the hon. Gentleman and the Chancellor of the Exchequer consider at least some extraordinary means to deal with an extraordinary situation? Why cannot they let the banks give credit to industry starting up in Scotland without restriction, instead of leaving them tied as they are?

Answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he studied the detailed figures of the tenders submitted to the Staffordshire Potteries Water Board by the four firms that recently tendered for cast-iron pipes and special castings; and why he decided to refer this matter to the Registrar of Restrictive Trading Agreements.

My right hon. Friend has studied the information supplied to him on this subject. The suggestion had been made by some hon. Members that the fact that closely similar tenders were submitted indicated that a registered agreement, supposed to have been terminated, had been revived. Investigation of complaints on this score is a matter for the Registrar and not for the Monopolies Commission.

Does not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that this is the second occasion that this has happened within two years? If he has studied the figures carefully he must be aware that the chance of coincidence must be more than one in a million—one in a billion? How long are local citizens to be held up to ransom in this way? The answer he gave to my hon. Friends does not really suggest that there is much intelligence in the people who prepared the answers.

It is true that the Registrar did investigate a similar complaint last year and then found that there was no reasonable cause for him to believe that a registrable agreement did exist in this case. The papers have been referred to the Registrar and he is now looking into them.

Does the hon. Gentleman not realise that exactly the same Answer was given to us before? We were told at that time that if further tenders were asked for and the same thing happened the matter would be dealt with. Tenders were asked for, and the same thing happened. We have had the same thing happen again. Is the local authority, the Staffordshire Potteries Water Board, to be held up by high interest rates, on the one hand, and, on the other, at the point of a gun by firms such as these?

As I said, it is not a matter for my right hon. Friend, and the papers have gone to the Registrar.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a further statement on his negotiations for the removal of the United States wool tariff quota.

I have at present nothing to add to my reply to the right hon. Member for Battersea, North (Mr. Jay) on 30th June.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is not much good urging the exporters to export more goods if they are already only too willing to do so but are prevented by prohibitive tariffs? While I agree about the removal of the wool tariff quota, is he aware of the report in the American Press that this is to be replaced by a 38 per cent. ad valorem duty plus weight duty, and will he agree that this would mean infringing the terms of G.A.T.T.? Are the Government, as a member of G.A.T.T., free to object to it?

The hon. Member's first proposition is, I think, quite unexceptionable. On the second point, I have seen rumours in the Press. They are quite unauthorised. I do not think I can make any comment till there is an official statement.

They may be unauthorised in the official sense, but the trade has good reason to believe this is the very type of settlement which the United States wish to impose on the British Government. Will my right hon. Friend look at the matter again, if he cannot say anything more at this juncture, to make quite sure that this type of imposition does not in fact take place?

The United States Government are quite well aware of our views in this matter. There are other parties concerned, the Italians and the Japanese, for instance. However, it is not possible to comment till there is an official announcement.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these tariff quotas are heavily weighted by the United States in favour of the Japanese on political and strategic grounds? Is it not time that representations were made on a much stronger basis to see to it that there is not the unfair opposition experienced by British manufacturers in the United States?

I agree that the tariff quota system has worked against us, but I do not think that that was the deliberate intention and we are very much hoping it will be done away with.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the quantity of new potatoes imported from Greece in the month of June this year, or to the latest convenient date; and how this compares with the quantity imported in the same period in 1959.

Imports during the months of May, 1959 and 1960, were nil and 5,528 tons, respectively.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there have been very wild statements in some sections of the agricultural Press about the extent to which Greek imports were likely to capture the home market for new potatoes? Is he aware that this upsetting of the new potato trade by excessive imports is a very serious matter for the whole potato-growing industry? Is he aware that new potatoes, if they are not eaten, grow into old potatoes and, therefore, make serious difficulties for the Government in implementing their guarantee of the potato crop which they have entered into with the farming community?

The imports last year were nearly 10,000 tons. I would expect the rate of imports from Greece to decline, because in the middle of May a heavy duty of £9 6s. 8d. a ton on new potatoes began to apply.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this import of potatoes has caused great concern among Tory farmers in my constituency and that they have asked me to take the matter up? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this has a very grave effect on new potato growing in the west of Scotland and that recently cargoes of Belgian potatoes have been arriving as well as those from Greece? Is he aware that a small number of speculators are making very big profits out of something which is ruining Ayrshire potato-growing?

Whilst I welcome the hon. Member's impartiality, he has a little over-stated the position. The facts about Greek imports are as I have stated them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade in view of the latest trade returns, what further steps he proposes taking to stimulate British exports.

The Board of Trade is constantly seeking to extend the services it provides for exporters and to bring to the attention of all businessmen the need for exports and the range of opportunities open in overseas markets.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the Prime Minister could tell us far more yesterday when he was speaking about this problem? The Prime Minister is evidently worried about its gravity. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his right hon. Friend said yesterday to 400 businessmen that Britain can sell any quantity of goods in any number of markets? There is no restriction. Does that mean that the President of the Board of Trade will now approve the trade agreement which has just been made by the Institute of Directors with Russian manufacturers covering the next 20 years and there will be no restriction on the type of goods that we export?

I am well aware what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said, because I was at the meeting. A trade agreement between the Institute of Directors and the Russian Government seems a rather unusual form of agreement and I should like to see details before commenting on it.

As it is widely thought that there are many small firms in Scotland which might enter the export markets for the first time, might I ask my right hon. Friend whether his own Department sponsors meetings in various localities or encourages chambers of commerce in these areas to have meetings of the smaller firms to put before them the opportunites that are available?

Yes, indeed. We are certainly doing that and I should be grateful for the assistance of all hon. Members in pushing this campaign forward.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that the agreement made by the delegation from the Institute of Directors is now in his hands awaiting his approval?

No, Sir. I am afraid that I am not aware of that.

The right hon. Gentleman had better wake up.

To ask Mr. Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will defer his sanction to the loan of £18 millions at 4½ per cent. to the Cunard Company until such time as a comparable rate of interest is available to local authorities for housing loans.

Before putting Question No. 34, Mr. Speaker, may I ask whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer has indicated to you any intention to make a statement to the House today about an announcement made by him last Friday in reply to a Written Question from a Conservative Member announcing a further increase in interest rates? Alternatively, has the right hon. Gentleman indicated to you any intention to answer Questions Nos. 57, 59, 60 and 64?

Order. I called the hon. Member to ask Question 34.

The proposals contained in the Chandos Report are being examined and account will be taken of all relevant considerations.

But is it not a grave injustice that the Government are raising interest rates on public housing loans at the very moment that they are reducing the rate to certain private firms? Is the Chancellor aware that a £1,500 council house will now cost £5,510 by the time that it has paid interest for 60 years at the new rate of 6 per cent.? Is he aware that this difference of 1½ per cent. will add £1,160 to the total cost of the house, or 7s. 6d. a week extra on the rent?

The second half of the hon. Member's supplementary question may arise on another Question, but I do not think that it arises on this.

It does.

On the first part of the hon. Member's supplementary question, I repeat that account will be taken of all relevant considerations.

Is there any reason why the Cunard Line should be specially favoured by obtaining a loan of this character at 4½ per cent.? Does the right hon. Gentleman intend to use this as a precedent so that other shipowners who are anxious to replace old vessels, instead of going to the finance houses and the banks for loans at 7 per cent. or 8 per cent., should have the advantage of the facilities which are to be provided for the Cunard Company?

I should like to repeat to the right hon. Gentleman what I have just said, and that is that the proposals are under examination and account will be taken of all relevant considerations.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will amend the regulations on the repayment of post-war credits so as to enable them to be repaid to married women who would have qualified under the existing regulations if they had not exercised their right as married women to opt out of National Insurance.

I assume that the hon. Member has in mind married women who are sick but do not qualify for sickness benefit because they have opted not to pay National Insurance contributions. Repayment of post-war credits in these cases would raise a number of practical difficulties to which a satisfactory solution has not yet been found.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, as in the Blackburn case which I recently sent to his Department, it is possible that women who have been sick for two years and longer and who, if they opted into National Insurance, would be classified as hardship cases under the new regulations are left without any help although their hardship is exactly the same? Surely this sort of case enables the Minister to make a clear and objective test of hardship which is the one which he has said he has chosen for his new plan. Will not he reconsider the matter?

No. The hon. Lady wrote to me and I considered the matter very carefully. But, as I explained to the House before, in deciding the degree of hardship which would justify the early repayment of post-war credits we have to depend on clearly definable categories. I am aware that among the chronic sick there are many people whom we cannot cover because we cannot bring them into a clearly definable category. I have looked at the matter very carefully and I am afraid that what I have said holds good. We should depend here on the rendering of medical certificates which vary very much, and we could not get the necessary uniformity.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will arrange for claims for the apportionment of post-war credits between husband and wife to be entertained outside the time limits laid down in the statutory regulations in those cases where the wife is later separated from her husband.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will make arrangements whereby claims to apportionment of post-war credits made outside the prescribed time limit will be accepted in cases where the husband and wife have been divorced or are legally separated.

In future, claims to apportionment of post-war credits will be accepted outside the time limit from wives who are divorced or legally separated from their husbands in cases where the full credit has not already been paid before the apportionment is made. They will then be able to obtain repayment of their part of the credit when they satisfy the conditions.

I think that I can thank the right hon. Gentleman for that rather complicated Answer. May I ask him whether it covers the two Blackburn cases which have been submitted to his Department in Which wives who have been separated from their husbands for four years and are now trying to get their share of post-war credits made over to them have been refused repayment even after appeal to the Minister? In view of the very important evidence which I have put before the right hon. Gentleman, does this mean that he has now changed his mind and that they will get their money?

I should like to assure the hon. Lady that there is no snag in this. I think that she has reason to thank me, and I hope that my hon. Friend the Member for East Grinstead (Mrs. Emmet) will also thank me. I should like to underline that this is a change in procedure. It will apply to wives who are divorced or legally separated where the post-war credit has not already been paid to the 'husband. If it has been paid already, there is nothing more we can do about it.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for the change, which will be very helpful, may I ask him whether he can do something about the very outrageous case which occurred in my constituency where the post-war credits earned by a woman were paid to the woman her husband ran away with and subsequently married after a divorce? In this lady's words, the Treasury

"has paid out my money…to someone who, both on moral and legal grounds, has no right to it".

This is just like ladies. I have been nice to my hon. Friend, but she wants me to be nicer still. I am afraid that I cannot help her in the case which she has mentioned, as I understand it, because I believe that the amount has been paid to the husband and, therefore, there is nothing more to pay. Otherwise if a case is covered by the phrase "divorced or legally separated" it looks as if a payment will be due. Perhaps my hon. Friend will get in touch with me again on this matter.

I thank my right hon Friend very much.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give details of the public money made available to Rural Industries Loan Fund. Limited, in each year since 1955, and of the amount of interest charged.

This Society is financed by means of grants and loans from the Development Fund. No interest is charged on the Development Fund loans. With permission, I will circulate details in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is it not the case that under the Labour Government no interest whatsoever was charged but that now interest is being charged at 5½ per cent.? Would not the right hon. Gentleman consider reverting to interest-free loans so that these small rural industries may be assisted in areas of high unemployment?

No, Sir. To the best of my knowledge, interest was charged under the Labour Government by the Society. Interest is not being charged by the Development Fund to the Society. I think, therefore, that the position is the same. If it is not, I will write and let the hon. Member know.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what action he now proposes to take to exercise a tighter control over the level of Government expenditure.

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister reminded the House on 30th June that decisions on Government policies involving expenditure, like all other decisions, are the collective responsibility of the Government. I would refer my hon. Friend in detail to what I said on this subject in my Budget statement and when moving the Second Reading of the Finance Bill. I would also remind him of my statement at the end of last month about the programme of expenditure on investment in the public sector.

That is all right as far as it goes, but is my right hon. Friend aware that no one is less happy than I that he has not been as successful in this field as he has in so many other parts of the economy? Will he undertake to consider with his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister what additional machinery can be evolved to ensure that there is a maximum level of expenditure in the economy and that expenditure does not rise in leaps and bounds, thereby either preventing worth-while reductions in taxation or a cut-back in investment?

I think it is unlikely that my hon. Friend and I will find ouselves in complete harmony on these matters. I think that on some of them the best thing that my hon. Friend and I can do is to beg to differ. I have made it perfectly clear that the increases in Government expenditure which have been approved to date have, in the opinion of the Government, been essential to fulfil the policies which have been repeatedly approved both by our party and by the nation at large.

asked the Prime Minister when he proposes to visit the People's Republic of China.

I have no plans for visiting the People's Republic of China.

Will the right hon. Gentleman indicate whether he would welcome an invitation? Is he aware that such a visit would open up and expand British exports to a market comprising 25 per cent. of the world's population and that he could as a result of such a visit well act as a peacemaker between China and the new Administration in the United States?

I am, of course, gratified by the hon. Gentleman's approval of what I try to do, but visits need careful timing and I do not honestly feel that this moment is the right one.

asked the Prime Minister to what extent it is his policy to permit the continuation of weather flights by U2 aircraft from Lakenheath airfield.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether, in discussing with President Eisenhower a revision of the understanding regarding the use of United States bases in this country, he will take into account the changes in nuclear strategy since 1951;

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether he will now require the United States Government either to give an undertaking to cease violating Soviet territorial sovereignty by reconnaissance flights by British-based aircraft and to accept British control over every United States aeroplane initiating a flight from bases in the United Kingdom, or to remove all United States bases from this country;

asked the Prime Minister under what conditions United States reconnaissance aircraft are allowed to operate from the Royal Air Force Station, Brize Norton, and other Royal Air Force airfields.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of recent happenings, he proposes to continue his policy of allowing United States armed forces to occupy bases in this country.

asked the Prime Minister, in view of the widespread concern in this country resulting from the disclosure that a United States aeroplane based on this country was shot down whilst flying over or near Russian territory, what action he has taken to prevent such flights by British based United States aircraft.

asked the Prime Minister if, in his negotiations with President Eisenhower on the future use of United States bombing bases in Great Britain, he has placed before him an account of the possibilities of explosions of hydrogen bombs over this country, as described in White Papers on defence and civil defence.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is now in a position to make a statement regarding the new arrangements that have been reached with the Government of the United States of America regarding flights by United States aircraft from bases on British territory.

The understanding relating to the use by United States forces of bases in this country in an emergency has often been referred to in the House. It was first reached between Mr. Attlee and President Truman in October, 1951, and was confirmed in January, 1952, by my right hon. Friend the Member for Woodford and President Truman. It was confirmed again with President Eisenhower's Administration in March, 1953, when Sir Anthony Eden visited Washington as Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there will be wide agreement in the House that a much more precise agreement between the United States and Britain is required to govern the peacetime use of these bases? But there will be very little understanding in the House why Her Majesty's Government should have waited this long time before seeking to regularise the matter. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to answer the Question on the Order Paper regarding the use of Lakenheath base for U2 flights? In particular, will he clear up the persistent confusion between himself and the right hon. Gentleman the Secretary of State for Air, who maintains that the U2 flights admitted to have taken place were concerned with secret intelligence, whereas the Prime Minister wrongly informed the House last week that they were innocent weather flights?

The hon. Gentleman has misrepresented me. I did not make, and would not have made, any change in the policy, which has been followed by all Governments, of not making statements on matters of intelligence, or which approach intelligence. However, in a supplementary question the point was raised as to some evidence which had been given before the United States Senate Foreign Relations Committee and I undertook to look into the matter. I considered the evidence and pointed out—and I quoted it—that it referred to weather flights and not to flights over Soviet territory.

I studied with great care the evidence which the Prime Minister was kind enough to send me. Is he aware that, in the first place, there is no reference in it as to the direction of these flights? The flights are simply referred to as weather flights by Mr. Dryden, who also referred to the flight of the U2 aircraft brought down in Sverdlovsk as a weather flight. It was the unanimous agreement of the American Press in reporting Mr. Dryden's evidence that it was clear that he had no idea of the precise function of the U2 aircraft which had been assigned to the N.A.S.A. Is it not also clear that the Prime Minister has not the slightest idea of what these aircraft were doing?

If the hon. Gentleman attached so little weight to the evidence given to the Senate Corn-mince, I do not know why he quoted it. I quoted it because I thought it was courteous to do so as he had made reference to it. Otherwise I would have stood on time-honoured practice by not referring to it in detail. As to why it has taken so long to regularise the arrangements, this form of flights has been going on for twelve years. They have been from time to time adjusted and ad hoc arrangements made, as I have already said. Again, as I have already said, I think that it is always right to see whether we need to improve them and reconsider them, or to make changes in our mutual arrangements in the light of present circumstances.

Will the right hon. Gentleman deal with the question of changes in nuclear strategy since 1951? We were then dealing with atom bombs, whereas now we are dealing with hydrogen bombs capable of annihilating the entire country in an hour or two. In addition, the present American nuclear strategy is based on the conception of multiplying the number of targets so as to draw the enemy's fire, with this country having the function of providing one of the targets. Does this not alter the situation?

Of course, the situation has altered, and is continually altering. We must take account of all relevant facts. This kind of reconnaissance flights—I shall not say U2 flights, for they were not in existence—have been taking place by both the United States and the British Air Forces for at least twelve years. These flights are perfectly legal and are in international air space. I want to make that perfectly clear.

Would the right hon. Gentleman be good enough to answer Question No. 46? Will the new agreement include an obligation on the part of the United States to observe the prescriptions of international law, and the obligations of the United Nations Charter, in our relations with the Soviet Union? Will there be a prohibition in the new agreement against violating the air sovereignty of any country for any purposes by flights initiated from this country?

That does not arise, because President Eisenhower has stated that these over-flights will not take place. I do not think I want to use such strong words as "new agreement". I want to see whether we can bring the existing operations, either by the main understanding, or from time to time agreed methods, into close harmony and closely related to the serious factors which have developed in the world today.

Since all the flight plans are shown to the Royal Air Force, will the right hon. Gentleman give instructions that any flight plans which show a flight near Soviet territory are brought to the attention of Ministers?

I understand from what my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Air said that flight plans constitute a procedure chiefly connected with the requirements of safety and identification as planes come in and out of this country. That is the main purpose of the plans. This whole question will be reconsidered in my discussion with the President. I take note of what the hon. Member said.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how many bases in the United Kingdom are being used for these U2 flights? Is he aware that the Prestwick air base is the nearest to Moscow? Can he say whether the American base there is being used for these flights?

The hon. Gentleman is confused. The main purpose of these Questions was about the RB-47 flights. Only one airfield, as far as I know, had the other form of aircraft.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I think that in fairness the Prime Minister ought to know that my Question—— [Interruption.]—It is only fair—

I cannot hear what it is. Let us hear it.

It is only fair that the Prime Minister should know that my Question was put down before the flight he referred to.

That is not a point of order.

The Prime Minister made great play, when last he answered this question, of the fact that many of the objections come from those people who do not want American bases here at all. Is he aware that I have spoken to many responsible people who are appalled, as a result of evidence that bas emerged, that the Prime Minister knows very little about this matter, and that one slip could be a disaster for the British nation? In view of that, and the evidence that also is available, there are many people who doubt that any American politicians will be able to control successfully the American military machine, and as a consequence there will now be more doubts than ever as to the value of the American bases here. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that it will be up to him to convince them that he will get some form of control that will keep our fate in our hands and not in American hands?

I have taken note of the hon. Member's views, which he expresses with his usual force. But I do not think that his premises are correct. I will try, in the statement which I shall now make, to take some of these matters further.

Did the right hon. Gentleman believe, and does he now believe, the statement to the world by the State Department in Washington about the flight of the aircraft which was shot down over Sverdlovsk? Is he aware that the world now knows that the Americans told a thumping lie about this business? Is he also aware that last week he made a contemptuous reference to the N.U.R., but that the N.U.R. is a far more responsible body than the Cabinet that went into war over Suez?