asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the high profits now being made in the Lancashire cotton trade, he will review the necessity for continuing the policy of giving grants of public money for scrapping and modernisation; how much has been paid out already; how much has been claimed; what the total cost is expected to be; and if he will make a statement.

The estimated costs to the Exchequer of payments for eliminating excess capacity under the reorganisation schemes is about £13 million of which nearly £5 million has been paid. Applications so far received for re-equipment grants would, if fully accepted, cost some £2½ million. The best provisional estimate I can give of the total cost of the arrangements under the Cotton Industry Act remains about £30 million. The fact that the textile trade is now prospering does not seem to me to justify interfering with a scheme that is working well.

Could my right hon. Friend tell me what earthly justification there can be for pumping public money into an industry which is already over-prosperous? How can it be justified? Since the industry is now undoubtedly acknowledged to be prosperous, why is not the scheme ended so that the public purse can be saved this money?

The reasons for doing this were very fully argued when Parliament passed the Cotton Industry Act. The fact that the industry is now prospering seems not to militate against the scheme but rather to encourage one to think that it is right.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, since the scheme was brought into operation, the price of cotton goods has increased and delivery for many piece goods has gone up to twelve months?

Of course, the introduction of the scheme has coincided with a considerable boom in the demand for textile goods throughout the world.

Did not the present Minister of Education when President of the Board of Trade promise Lancashire, in the course of the election campaign, that £50 million of public money would be spent? Can the present President of the Board of Trade endorse that estimate?

I think that the estimate already given was £30 million, to which we stick. We have no desire to spend more than that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he is taking to encourage British manufacturers to make more effective use of his Department's export services and the Exports Credits Guarantee Department and to sell sufficient goods abroad.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proposals he has for stimulating British exports, in view of the recently published trade returns.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, having regard to the great increase in world export trade and the steadily decreasing share which Great Britain has had in it in recent years, he will indicate Her Majesty's Government's policy with regard to increasing the United Kingdom's exports.

I would refer the hon. Members to the reply which I gave the hon. Member for Glasgow, Govan (Mr. Rankin) on 19th July.

Is the right hon. Gentleman relying purely on words? Is he satisfied that his commercial staff overseas is adequate to provide proper advice to our exporters, and does he intend to do anything material in the way of financial inducements for certain kinds of exports so that we have the best sort of exports with the best sort of effect on the economy?

The commercial officers of the Government overseas are extremely good in general, and I should be very happy to receive advice or suggestions. As regards financial inducements, we have always taken the line that export subsidies in any form are bad because, if we enter into competition with other countries in export subsidies, we are almost certain to lose.

Does my right hon. Friend feel that the disappointing performance of British exports in the first six months of the year demonstrates clearly that this is the major economic danger spot for a forthcoming economic crisis? Has my right hon. Friend perused the correspondence columns of the Financial Times and The Times, and has he noted the feeling expressed in many quarters that the official facilities provided by the Department are not entirely satisfactory? Will he consider again whether the official facilities utilised by the Dollar Exports Council in the official sphere could be put on a wider basis to spread the advantage of its benefits?

I would not talk about an economic crisis—I think that that would be wrong—but I agree that the expansion of our exports is necessary if we are to do all the things we wait to do in the world. The correspondence in the newspapers is being followed very closely by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State, and we are taking careful note of every point made in the columns of the newspapers. I think that the facilities available at the Board of Trade are as good as they are in any other country, although, obviously, they can always be improved. I am considering whether there could be advantage in extending the Dollar Exports Council system to other areas.

Is not the real truth of the matter that, apart from the measures to which reference has been made, which have only a minor or marginal effect, the Government have no policy at all for increasing exports and, like Mr. Micawber, they are just waiting for something to turn up?

I have not noticed that the Opposition have much to offer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proportion of our export trade is accounted for by the large firms, details of which have been sent to him by the hon. Member for Twickenham; and whether he will suggest further measures for spreading the burden of exports more widely among smaller firms.

No official statistics are available about the proportion of export trade done by large companies. An unofficial study suggests that it is high. Many small firms conduct a thriving direct export trade, and many more contribute essential components to the exports of large concerns. The Government's aim is to bring the attention of all businessmen, large and small, to the need for exports, the range of opportunities open in overseas markets, and the Government services available to help them.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the statement that 30 per cent. of our exports are made by only forty firms—the large ones—and that there are hundreds of small firms making finished products which are not making any exports at all? Has not the time arrived when there ought to be some system of guarantees or incentives to encourage smaller firms to go out into the world and export?

I am not sure about a special scheme of guarantees and incentives, but, as my hon. Friend says, there is no doubt that there is scope for a much greater export effort by many of our smaller and medium-sized firms.

While paying a tribute to the most excellent services provided by the Export Services Branch of the Board of Trade, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether the time has not come when there should be a large reinforcement of the commercial element in our missions abroad so as to deal not merely with commercial inquiries but with specific commercial problems which arise for small firms which possibly do not understand local business psychology?

I am grateful to the hon. Member for what he said about the services provided by the Board of Trade because, whatever political view we take about Government Ministers, I am sure that we all agree that the officials do an extremely good job. I should like to consider his suggestion. I am grateful for his suggestion and any other suggestions about ways in which our services can be improved for the benefit of exporters.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm or deny the remarkable estimate that 30 per cent. of our exports are done by forty firms?

I have already said in reply that there was an unofficial study. I think that that neither confirms nor denies.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what percentage of the total new factory space in square feet for which industrial development certificates were granted in Great Britain was accounted for by the London and South-Eastern Region in the first half of 1958, 1959, and 1960, respectively, and what were the corresponding percentages for the Scottish, Northern and Welsh Regions, taken together.

For schemes of over 5,000 square feet in manufacturing industry, the London and South Eastern Region's share was 20·2 per cent. in the first six months of 1958, 17·4 per cent, in 1959 and 9·7 per cent. in the first three months of 1960. Corresponding figures for Scotland, Wales and the Northern Region combined were 20·1 per cent., 29·2 per cent. and 16·2 per cent.

If I understand those figures aright, there seems to be an encouraging reduction in the share going to London and the South-East, which I hope will be continued; but will the right hon. Gentleman explain why, apparently, the figures for, roughly speaking, the development district regions have declined in the early months of 1960, as compared with 1959?

It is wrong to proceed on the basis of two or three months' figures because one might have one big project which would distort the figures. Also, I think that it would be wiser to take the figures on the basis of employment rather than factory space. Broadly speaking, no new manufacturing industry has come to the London area, and the schemes in terms of square footage which have been approved have, by and large, been extensions which could not take place elsewhere.

Can the right hon. Gentleman explain why, in the first three months of 1960, according to his figures, there was apparently a reduction in the proportion going to the development district regions? Was that accidental or deliberate?

I have said that one ought not to take it on a short-term basis. If one takes it in terms of employment, which seems to be what matters, in the first three months of 1960 the figure for London and the South-East was 4·5 per cent. and for the other area mentioned it was 22·6 per cent.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the progress of his plans to date for attracting new industries to Aberdeen.

At the Board of Trade we are continuing our efforts to attract new industry to Aberdeen, and we have intimated our willingness to give what help and advice we can to the North-East Development Committee in Scotland.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that he and his predecessors have been giving that sort of answer, expressing willingness, for eight years? Promises of that kind have been made, and Aberdeen and the north-east of Scotland is littered with broken promises. Will the President of the Board of Trade do something constructive to bring new industry to Aberdeen?

I always express, and will express, willingness to help. What I cannot do is express willingness to direct, and, indeed, I do not think that the hon. and learned Gentleman has ever asked us to do so. All we can do is to help people who want to go to Aberdeen. In the first place, there must be people who want to do so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that several United States firms have visited Scotland looking for factory sites and that over a score of United States firms are investigating possibilities of extending United States trade in Scotia id; and if he will now make a detailed statement on the Scottish locations considered and the nature of the industries proposed.

Yes, Sir. I am happy to say that a number of United States firms are interested in the possibilities which Scotland affords, and my officials are at present dealing with active inquiries which, if they are successful, child produce a substantial number of new jobs. We know also of many United States firms which are interested in making licensing arrangements with Scottish firms. The hon. and learned Member will appreciate that I cannot reveal the details of confidential discussions with individual firms.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that his Answers to this Question and to Question No. 5 are abject confessions of failure? If he cannot show any initiative in this matter, will he take a line from Lord Polwarth and the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) who are doing very good work in this respect, and will he try to do something constructive?

The Scottish Council is certainly doing extremely good work. I can only suggest that the hon. and leaned Gentleman should read my Answer to the last Question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he is taking to guide industrial enterprises to Thorne, in view of the unemployment rate of 4·4 per cent. in that area of Yorkshire.

Thorne is not, in the opinion of the Board of Trade, a locality in which a persistently high rate of unemployment exists or is expected; it is therefore not eligible for the special incentives to industry provided by the Local Employment Act. My Depart- ment will, however, continue to bring the facilities offered by the area to the attention of suitable firms, subject to the overriding needs of the development districts.

If the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied that 4·4 per cent. does not render Thorne qualified for special treatment, will he tell the House what figure of unemployment does qualify for special attention? Will he give up making ineffectual noises at the Box about being anxious to help when there is such a scandalously high level of unemployment in this area and he does nothing?

We must preserve a sense of proportion in this. Thorne is within eight miles of Doncaster, where the unemployment rate was 1·1 per cent. and there are several hundred new jobs in prospect.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a full statement on the import effects of the new Anglo-Japanese trade agreement; what is the increase allowed in the yearly quota of pottery imports; and whether the appropriate trade organisations were consulted.

The new trade arrangements with Japan for the period up to 31st March, 1961, provide additional opportunities for trade in both directions. To allow for increased imports from Japan quotas on a range of goods have been increased in total by £2·5 million and a number of goods have been placed on open licence. A full list of the goods affected and of the new quotas has been published in the Board of Trade Journal.

Is there any increase, in quota or otherwise, for carpets coming from Japan?

The Question referred to pottery. However, I can tell my hon. Friend that the new quotas have been published in the Board of Trade Journal. In view of the assiduity of his reading, I am surprised that he does not know the answer already.

What goods do we expect to get into Japan in increased quantities in return for this?

A wide range of goods—machine tools, woollen textiles, razor blades, whisky, and many other things.

Why not answer about carpets? I do not think that my right hon. Friend knows the answer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what undertakings were requested and given, respectively, by either party during the negotiations on the Anglo-Japanese trade agreement.

I cannot disclose details of what passed during the negotiations. The arrangements concluded have been announced in the Board of Trade Journal.

The issues involved in this Question are too serious to treat like this. While not attributing any responsibility to the present President of the Board of Trade, may I ask whether he would agree that it is a fact that our trade needs have been subordinated to the foreign policy of another country? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that in future we shall make it quite clear to the world that our economic needs are such that our trade must come before everything else?

I am grateful for the opportunity of making it absolutely clear that in working out these new trade arrangements the sole concern of the Board of Trade was the interest of British trade as a whole. We are quite satisfied that the arrangements will lead to an expansion of trade on both sides, and my belief is that if British exporters take all the opportunities open to them we shall gain on balance.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what plan he has for the three district authorities within the Crook employment exchange area, scheduled under the Employment Act, to receive industrial aid, as basic industries decline and unemployment increases.

Industrial projects to be located in the Bishop Auckland development district, which includes Crook, are eligible for the assistance available under the Local Employment Act, and my Department will continue to do all it can to encourage new industry to go there.

I want to thank the Minister for his sympathetic approach to this problem in previous correspondence I have had with him, but sympathy is not enough. This area is declining in its basic industries and migration is speeding up. It was stated on the tape only yesterday that 10,000 to 15,000 extra jobs are being created in the London area, which will cause further social problems. Will the Minister do some planning and get industry into these areas?

I am aware of the difficulties in this area, and I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are doing all we can to help.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is satisfied with the amount of waste paper being collected by local authorities for salvage; what is the total amount for the last twelve months; and how many local authorities are still outside the scheme.

I have not heard of any dissatisfaction with the amount collected. I understand that 1,223,000 tons were received by the paper mills in 1959. Local authorities are not obliged to report on their collection of waste paper, but I am aware that at least 750 authorities collect regularly.

If the scheme for the salvage of waste paper is to be of any value, what steps is my right hon. Friend taking to encourage local authorities and any other agencies outside the scheme to come into the scheme? In view of the large amount of waste paper received by hon. Members, is the Palace of Westminster within the scheme for reclamation and salvage?

I suspect that that is a question for one or other of my right hon. Friends.

asked the Pre-sident of the Board of Trade what was the quantity of new potatoes imported from Belgium in the month of June, and the first two weeks in July; and how this compares with the quantity imported in the same period in 1959.

I regret that details of Belgian imports for the month of June are not yet available and that weekly figures are not collected.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise what damage he is doing to the new potato trade in the west of Scotland where the farmers say that they have never had it so bad? Is he aware that I would invite him to see for himself if I could guarantee his personal safety? The Secretary of State for Scotland is going there next week, and will the right hon. Gentleman consult him before the same thing happens next year?

The invitation is tempting, but I hope that the qualification is unnecessary.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, though he may not have the figures, growers of early potatoes are very conscious of the presence of Belgian imports? Will he bear in mind also that the consumer really does not get any improved conditions as a result of these imports? They dislocate the trade. They hang over and complicate the market of main crop potatoes, for which, in the end, the Government have to provide a guarantee. Is he satisfied that the anti-dumping provisions are quick enough in operation to cover all cases of this kind?

I will certainly look into the question of the anti-dumping provisions if I am given any evidence on that point. The imports from Belgium up to the end of May were not on a significant scale, and there is a protective seasonal tariff which rises to £9 6s. 8d. between 16th May and 30th June.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that he has allowed a 12 per cent. increase in potato imports recently, and that, in fact, there has been rather a storm of indignation about it in Scotland, especially in the west of Scotland? The Tory chairman of the Ayr County Council, himself a farmer, writing in the Scottish Farmer, says that the industry is sick of being overloaded with home supplies. If that is so, ought not the right hon. Gentleman to tell those concerned in sufficient time for them to reduce their potato acreage and to get on with growing something else that will sell?

I will certainly look into the question of dumping. There is a substantial seasonal protective tariff, and I am not prepared to accept that the fact that imports of a commodity have gone up is a bad thing in itself.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the has any statement to make on the provision of new industries in the new town of Peterlee and adjoining districts.

As I told the right hon. Member on 284th April, the Board of Trade will continue to bring the advantages of Peterlee, including the industrial sites available, to the attention of firms seeking a new location. As Peterlee is in a development district, the inducements provided by the Local Employment Act should be a further encouragement to industry to go to the locality.

Is the President of the Board of Trade aware that this town has now been in existence for more than ten years, and that the total amount of employed female labour is no more than 600 persons? If he cannot direct industry to come to Peterlee and the adjoining area, where there is great danger of mining redundancy, will he at least provide facilities for the existing firms, which are anxious to expand in order to enter the export trade? Will he make some inquiry into that aspect?

All the facilities under the Local Employment Act are available. On 26th January, my 'hon. Friend the Parliamentary Secretary said that a new factory under construction should provide 140 additional jobs, rising to 350. Other developments within travel-to-work distance were expected to provide 3,000 more jobs, and that estimate certainly stands.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what reply he has sent to the South-Western Council of the National Chamber of Trade in reply to its representations about inducements to attract new industries to the south-west of England.

I presume that the hon. Member is referring to a letter dated 19th July sent by the Council to my Department and largely concerned with pressing south-west England's needs for improved communications. A reply has been sent, and the Council will no doubt be informing the hon. Member of its contents.

Will the right hon. Gentleman do all he can to see that these improved communications extend to Cornwall, and particularly to my constituency and to the town of Camborne-Redruth, whose exports of engineering and other products exceed, for a town of its size, those of almost any other town in the country?

I am well aware of the importance of good communications with London and the Midlands for towns in this area.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the dominant factors which are taken into account in considering applications for assistance under the Board of Trade Advisory Committee scheme.

The factors which are taken into account are the requirements laid down in the Local Employment Act. Dominant amongst these are the location of the project, the employment it is likely to provide, the expenditure involved and the applicant's prospects of success.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there have been fourteen applications for aid under the scheme since it was introduced, but that, to the best of my knowledge, no application has yet been granted? Will he please again look very closely into this, because there is a most pressing need in the South-West, and particularly in Cornwall, for some kind of additional industry? We have not had any additional industries as yet.

I gather that there have been fourteen applications from Cornwall, of which eleven are under consideration. I must say that I follow this as closely as I can, and I have satisfied myself that the considerations laid down by Parliament when passing the Local Employment Act are being closely followed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will use his powers under Section 1 (2) of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956, to secure early consideration by the Restrictive Practices Court of the agreement between manufacturers of telephone equipment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will direct the Registrar of Restrictive Trade Practices, under Section 1 (2) of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, to give priority to the bringing of the agreement on the supply of telephone equipment before the Restrictive Practices Court.

I assume that the hon. Members are referring to the bulk supplies agreements between the Postmaster-General and certain manufacturers of telecommunications equipment. I am advised by the Registrar of Restrictive Trading Agreements that these agreements are not registrable. There is, therefore, no action for me to take.

Is not this really rather unsatisfactory? First, we are told that the Monopolies Act does not apply, and now we are told that the Restrictive Trade Practices Act does not work. Is it really in accordance with Government policy that the breaking of this monopoly should be left to a take-over bid by a private firm?

I do not think that that is the situation at all. The monopolies legislation will apply if there is a firm holding more than a certain percentage of the market. I do not think that there is in this case. The question of the Restrictive Trade Practices Act then arises, but there are, of course, clear provisions in that Act that agreements are not registrable where Crown privilege is involved, which is what occurs in this case.

Are there not two lots of agreement here; one agreement between the manufacturers themselves, and the manufacturers' agreements to supply things to the Post Office? There surely ca snot be an agreement between the Post Office and the seven or eight firms concerned without those seven or eight firms having an agreement among themselves to give effect to it.

I quite agree that there an: agreements to which the Crown is party and which, therefore, are not registrable. There are also agreements to which the Crown is not a party, which are on the register and may be brought before the court by the Registrar, but Parliament has given to the Registrar. and not to the Government, the power to determine the timing.

I think that the latter part of that reply is not quite correct. Under the Act, does not the President of the Board of Trade have power to suggest or give some indication to the Registrar as to the priorities of the agreements to be brought before the court?

We have, if necessary, I agree, power to issue directions, but I think that we would be wise to leave it to the Registrar—who, after all, is the man who runs the thing—as we have in this case, to determine the order in which this should be handled.

Is it not really a matter for investigation by the Select Committee of Public Accounts Committee?

If Parliament has specifically given the President of the Board of Trade the power to give instructions to the Registrar in these cases, why does he not do so in this case, in view of its of obvious importance?

As I have said, I do not think that, on the whole, we would be wise to issue a direction to the Registrar, who performs his duties ex- tremely well. The real question is whether an agreement to which the Post Office is a party is a good agreement. I think that that is the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Dover (Mr. Arbuthnot) had in mind, and questions on that are, I think, better addressed to my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the progress made in providing employment in the development districts specified under the Local Employment Act; and if any changes are contemplated in the list of these areas.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made in providing employment in the development districts designated under the Local Employment Act; and whether he proposes to make any changes in the list of these districts.

Considerable progress has been made. If projects go ahead as planned, new jobs in prospect in these districts are about 74,000 against average unemployment over the last twelve months of 133,000. There are three places, Merseyside, Llanelly and Sheerness, which I hope to be able to take off the list in the near future. The de-listing of these places depends on the outcome of applications for assistance at present under consideration, but to avoid the frustration of further applications and to concentrate our efforts on the remaining development districts and Northern Ireland, I have decided not to accept any more applications for these three places.

When considering the removal of Merseyside from the list, will my right hon. Friend take into account the present difficulties confronting the motor industry, which might frustrate or delay the plans it has in Merseyside at the moment?

Yes, certainly. That is why I have not actually taken Merseyside off the list, but have said that if all goes ahead as we hope, it will come off the list. In the meantime, it would be wrong to take on new applications. The figure of unemployment on Merseyside, at 3·4 per cent., is 20,000, and jobs in prospect amount to 33,000.

Not only as representing a Merseyside constituency but as the right hon. Gentleman's predecessor who first scheduled Merseyside as a development area, may I ask him, when considering this matter, to pay very careful attention to the danger of Merseyside becoming over-dependent on one single industry which, as we all know, can be highly vulnerable? While we have expressed our appreciation of the work done to bring motor car firms to Merseyside, may I ask him to be very careful to see that Merseyside does not suffer in the future, as so many other areas, including Merseyside, have suffered in the past, from being over-dependent on a single source of employment?

I certainly take that point—it is important. Of the 33,000 jobs in prospect, the motor industry accounts for 18,000—leaving 15,000 quite apart from the motor industry—against a total unemployment figure of 20,000, so I think that the position is really rather encouraging.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many applications for help for industries in the Falmouth and Camborne constituency have been received since 29th March, 1960; and how many have been granted.

Five applications for assistance under the Local Employment Act have been received from this area, of which one has been approved in principle and the remaining four are still under consideration.

Will the President of the Board of Trade give special consideration to the needs of my constituency, in view of the Ministry of Labour June count? Is he aware that the unemployment percentage in Falmouth was 10·2, that in Camborne and Redruth an engineering works is now on short time and that redundancies are expected soon; and that, in addition, there will be fifty redundancies at the I.C.I. factory at Tuckingmill, Camborne, next month? Will the right hon. Gentleman do all he can to persuade to replace the industry which is going to Scotland with another industry because of the ramifications of its operations?

I cannot agree to give special consideration to the constituency of any hon. Member. We must look at all of them in the light of their particular needs. As out of five applications one has been approved and the other four are still in play, I think the hon. Member is scoring rather well.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when work will commence on the second advance factory in Scotland.

As the Parliamentary Secretary said in answer to the hon. Member for Anglesey (Mr. C. Hughes) on 12th July, no decision has yet been reached about building further advance factories. I am keeping the matter under review.

How soon does the Minister expect to be able to give a decision on that matter? Does he not realise that if what the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) believes and what he himself said in answer to the Question put by my hon. Friend is true, that there will be firms looking for factory space, the Government should be getting on with the building of those factories and employing some of the unemployed building trade workers?

I agree that I think the case is a strong one, and I hope to be able to do something fairly soon.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will arrange for the Industrial Estates Management Corporation for Scotland to take over from the Admiralty the group of industrial buildings at Carfin, Lanarkshire, with a view to the letting of these buildings in whole or in part for manufacturing purposes.

No, Sir. The storage depot was inspected by Scottish Industrial Estates Limited and it was not considered suitable for industrial purposes without substantial modification.

Will the President of the Board of Trade correct this use of the term "storage depôt"? Is he aware that he has already been wrongly informed about the occupancy of this depot? Will he take it from me that he has been wrongly informed about the industrial potential of these excellent industrial buildings? In view of the fact that he has been wrongly informed about this place, will he undertake to see that there is a proper inspection of the industrial potential to see what can be done about this area?

I must admit that I was wrong in telling the hon. Member that this building was being used for whisky storage. It is being used for storage, but not for the storage of whisky. The fact is that the building was erected for use as a store and has been used as a store ewer since. That is a different thing from an industrial building.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what are the prospects for increased employment in The Hartlepools between now and 1962.

In the area covered 133 the West Hartlepool-Hartlepool development district, there are ten al proved new buildings and extensions under construction or to be started. The firms concerned estimate that a total of 2,500 additional jobs will result from these schemes, of which approximately 2,000 should accrue by the end of 1962.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that we still have 42 per cent. unemployed in that area and that we have a considerable acreage available for industrial development? Will he bear those facts in mind?

The latest number of unemployed in the district was 1,340, so that 2,000 additional jobs by the end of 1962 should be a considerable help.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, with a view to encouraging exports, he will consider producing a Board of Trade overseas export journal, containing information and advertisements relating to current British products, for distribution by consular offices overseas.

The requirements of export publicity vary too greatly from country to country, not least as regards language, and from product to product, and the range of products exported by British industry is too wide, for a Government publication of this kind to be practicable, but I am very grateful to my hon. Friend for his suggestion. [Laughter.]

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, and while acknowledging that there are some highly specialised and very excellent export journals, may I ask whether it might not be helpful to some of the smaller firms which cannot afford a large advertising campaign in foreign countries to have a medium in the form of a Government magazine which they could use for advertising purposes?

I think the difficulties that I have referred to are really insuperable. One is surprised that when one thanks hon. Members for making suggestions it is greeted by levity from the other side. I should have thought that in the matter of promoting exports there would have been a general desire to have put forward and received useful suggestions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will now extend the principle of equal pay for comparable work at present enjoyed by women in the public transport services to all women employed in transport in the Government service.

No, Sir. The Government have accepted the principle of equal pay for the non-industrial Civil Service, but in the case of industrial workers they follow the practice in outside industry. Most of the women to whom the hon. Member refers are in the second category.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the National Joint Council for Passenger Transport lays down one rate of pay for men and women? Is he not also aware that in the ambulance services all over the country women drivers and attendants get full pay and that therefore throughout the whole range of transport, private and public, outside Government service there is an overwhelming measure of equal pay? Is it not time, therefore, that the Government gave the girls in green and the women drivers of the Atomic Energy Authority the same rights as those which women enjoy outside Government service?

I do not think that the bon. Lady is correct when she says that that is overwhelmingly the case in outside industry. I am advised that in outside industry it is generally not the practice for the rates to be the same. Where they are the same, of course, that would be a factor in the comparison to which I have referred. The rates in force have been agreed with the trade unions concerned.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many co-operative societies and other co-operative organisations were contacted by his Department during the course of the inquiry into the effect on co-operative savings of the concession made to the Post Office Savings Bank and the Trustee Savings Banks in 1956.

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the reply which I gave him on 19th July, to which I have nothing to add.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the reply says that no inquiries were made at all? May I ask the Chancellor why, in turning down the Amendment on the Finance Bill on 22nd June, relating to co-operative small savings being exempted from Income Tax, it was said that it would not affect co-operative finances at all? Will the Minister explain why he repeatedly pays tribute at the Dispatch Box to the Cooperative movement and yet the present Government seem to take every opportunity to hamper the movement which belongs to 13 million people in this country, and not international financiers? Why are the Government so unhelpful to the Co-operative movement and so friendly to the speculators, profiteers and racketeers?

My hon. Friend the Economic Secretary, in the debate to which the hon. Gentleman has referred, stated that no evidence was to hand that there had been any major switches in co-operative savings to National Savings. He did not say that any inquiry had been made. He said there was no evidence to hand; that is, so far as we are concerned.

Mr. Jeger, Question No. 31.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has said that the words which I used were not spoken in the debate. I should like to refer the Chancellor to column 447 of the Report of the debate, when the Economic Secretary was challenged with these words:

" Since the hon. Gentleman has made inquiries, will he give us the source of his information, so that we may assess it?

Mr. BARBER: I have not the details with me, but that was the conclusion drawn by those who advised me quite fairly from the facts."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 22nd June, 1960; Vol. 625, c. 447.]

Nothing that the hon. Gentleman has said cannot be reconciled with what I have said. The Economic Secretary said that there was no evidence to hand that there had been switches. He expressed the opinion, therefore, that he did not think it was an important factor. He did not say that he had made inquiries.

Owing to the unsatisfactory answer, I give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has now concluded his discussions with the Arts Council on the proposal to build a National Theatre; and whether he is in a position to make a statement.

I have exchanged views with the Arts Council on this matter but am not yet in a position to make a statement.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that I put down this Question precisely in order to give him the opportunity to make his last appearance here a great occasion? Would not he reconsider this matter between now and tomorrow morning and, if possible, mike a special announcement that he has agreed that a National Theatre shall at last he built on the South Bank? Is he aware that the London County Council is holding on to a very suitable site for this theatre, but will not hold or to it for ever? Will the Government mike up their mind very quickly?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that, as long as I am in my present position, this will not be out of my thoughts day or night. I should like to say that there are a great many competing projects for the resources available and that this is not an easy decision to reach.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what would be the cost of making all previous service by temporary civil servants count in full in the computation of their pensions.

Capitalised, the cost is estimated at £175 million.

Would my right hon. Friend tell the House how much it would cost per annum if from this moment such previous service were counted in full for payment for all pensions now being paid, and would he state the maximum annual increase in cost to the Exchequer?

The annual cost would be about £6½ million to £7½ million, but in the first year it would cost about £20 million because it would, in the view of the Government, be necessary to revise the lump sum payments and pensions already made in the past at a cost of about £14 million.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer to what extent drawings on the foreign exchange reserves to meet obligations incurred in the financing of imports by acceptance credit are outweighed by the invisible earnings derived therefrom.

I regret that the available statistics do not provide the necessary information. The total of acceptances of all kinds outstanding at 31st March last—£145 million—was, however, only £5 million higher than the total at 31st March, 1958. These figures cover not only United Kingdom trade but also trade between countries overseas.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will introduce legislation to amend the 1946 Bank of England Act with a view to enabling Her Majesty's Government to give general directions to the banks on the extent of advances.

I see no present need for such legislation.

Would not a more forthcoming Answer be more appropriate at the end of the right hon. Gentleman's personally popular and not undistinguished term of office? Would not it be simpler than the boomerang weapon of the Bank Rate and the various esoteric measures of Government financial policy?

I am very grateful for the kind remarks which the hon. Gentleman made in the first part of his supplementary question. I see no present need for such legislation. Arrangements between the Treasury and the Bank of England and between the Bank of England and the banks respectively seem to me to work satisfactorily.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what negotiations have taken place or are contemplated between the Iron and Steel Holding and Realisation Agency and Mr. Charles Clore in connection with the sale of any part of the equity of Richard Thomas and Baldwins, Limited.

I cannot comment on rumours about bids for prospective sales of particular steel companies in public ownership.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask whether he does not feel that a more categorical assurance is required? Is he not aware that, after the last debate on Richard Thomas and Baldwins, Mr. Clore's spokesman announced that he would be interested in acquiring a substantial share of the equity if he were approached? Does not the Chancellor feel that a statement on this matter is therefore merited?

I do not think that I could regard it as right to make a statement on hearsay evidence of that nature.

Was it not categorically denied just before we adjourned for the Easter Recess that there were any dealings going on at all with Mr. Clore? Secondly, in the recent debate, was it not stated that the Government would not proceed with this act of vandalism either? [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."] In present circumstances, that is. In those circumstances does not it mean that the right hon. Gentleman's refusal to be more specific will give rise to a number of rumours that there is something very unsavoury going on?

I take note of the right hon. Gentleman's views.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in the interests of furthering a property-owning democracy, he will consider introducing a statutory restriction on the size of equity shareholding that may be sold or acquired in steel companies yet to be denationalised.

No, Sir.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are extremely respectable precedents for a policy of that kind? Is he not aware that he himself sets a limit on the holdings of National Savings Certificates and that the German Government, in denationalising Volkswagen, have made a limit on the number of equity shares which can be held so that the company can be owned by the small investor and not by the large financiers?

I do not think that the hon. Member's suggestion would accomplish his objective. There are many corporate bodies, such as insurance companies and pension funds, which invest on behalf of many small investors.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recall that Government spokesmen have given us the impression that a very large proportion of the steel industry is owned by millions of widows and very small shareholders? Is he now going back on that policy which would in fact produce a property-owning democracy of the type—at least that is the impression we have been under—which the Tories wish to create?

In denationalising account is taken of the welfare of the industry and the return to the taxpayers.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what effect the raising of the Bank Rate will have on the interest rates on future council house building loans and programmes.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the effect of his new financial policy, in particular the raising of the Bank Rate, on interest rates on loans to local authorities for the house building programmes.

It is not possible to estimate the effect of the recent increases in Bank Rate on future council house building loans or programmes since Bank Rate has no direct link with the rate at which local authorities raise capital for housing purposes either in the market or from the Public Works Loan Board.

Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware that this latest increase in housing interest rates, very quietly disclosed in that Written Answer, is bound to reduce still further the council house building programme, which since 1954 has already been cut by half, and therefore condemn to hopelessness the young married couples, the overcrowded and others on the tragic housing list? Can we be assured that, even without a further Bank Rate increase, there will not be an additional increase in housing interest rates before we resume in October?

The hon. Member knows that the rates charged by the Public Works Loan Board are comparable with tie rates charged in the market at the tine that any change is made. The most recent increase on these housing loans, which are generally of fifteen years or more, was ⅛per cent.

Does not the Chancellor appreciate that for local authorities with an appalling housing problem, and already faced with a steeply rising cost of land, the further increase in interest rates will mean that many will have to give up house building altogether unless they hive more assistance with their financial burden? Will he discuss with the Minister of Housing and Local Government the ways in which they can he helped. possibly by an increase in the expensive site subsidy, so that they can carry on building for those most in need?

The basic fact is that the demand for capital for many excellent projects greatly exceeds the resources available. That fact has to be taken into account.

is the right hon. Gentleman aware that while we disagree fundamentally with his policy on this matter and with the analysis which he has just given, we also feel that it is a little late to try to convert him to a more humane point of view? Arising out of that—I hope that you, Mr. Speaker, will feel that this part of the supplementary question follows directly on the Question on the Order Paper—and since this is almost certainly the last Question which the right hon. Gentleman will answer as Chancellor of the Exchequer, may I ask him whether he is aware that he will take to whatever work he may now go, or to retirement, the very best wishes from all on this side of the House?

I am very grateful for the right hon. Gentleman's kind remarks, which I appreciate deeply.

Will the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. Friend try to realise that this question of the increased interest rates on housing is a Very real burden and a very real problem to many thousands of people in this country? Even at this late stage, in spite of the apparent lack of interest of the Opposition, cannot the Chancellor at least persuade his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—[Interruption.]—we do not regard this as a laughing matter—that there are people in this country who are condemned to live in appalling conditions because of the policy of the Prime Minister?

There is one economic disaster which would be still worse than those which the hon. Lady has mentioned and which would mean more hardship to a greater number of people than anything else—and that is a return of inflation.