asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he is aware of the difficulties caused to the fishing industry by the present high cost of fishing gear; and what steps, by way of subsidy or otherwise, he plans to mitigate the loss and damage thereby caused to the fishing industry.

As the hon. and learned Member knows, subsidy is already paid to a large part of the industry. The subsidy rates are reviewed annually in the summer. The cost of fishing gear is one of the factors taken into account and this review will be taking place again later this year.

I know what the Minister has said, but does he not agree that in the case of tools and equipment for a productive industry such as the fishing industry there should be special mitigations with a view to reaping economic and other benefits for the nation? Will he now intercede with the Chancellor of the Exchequer at this particular time to see that special mitigations are accorded to the fishing industry?

As the hon. and learned Gentleman knows, this is reviewed every year. All costs are taken into account. The cost of fishing gear represents between 2 per cent. and 12 per cent. of the total cost, varying with the different types of fishing that is done. I do not consider that it is necessary for me to do any special interceding, as I am confident that the Government will come forward with what is right, proper and fair.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is now in a position to implement the recommendations of the Engholm Committee; and if he will make a statement.

With my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department, I am closely studying this Committee's proposals in the light of views submitted by the organisations representing the various interests concerned. I hope before long to make a statement on the Government's intentions.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply, but may I remind him that it is almost the same as the reply I received about five months ago to a similar Question? May I further remind him that it is very urgent to get some legislation on the go now to protect our plant and seed breeders from pirating of varieties?

If my hon. Friend asked a Question five months ago, it must have been very shortly after I had received the Report. Having received the Report, I took the right procedure of sending it to interested parties to get their comments. I asked for their comments by February of this year, which gave them a reasonable time. This is an important matter, and they wanted time to think about it. We received all the comments last month, and it remains now for me to examine the Report against the background and in the light of those comments. I hope that it will not be very much longer before I shall be able to give the House the result of our considerations, but I do not think that I can accept it as being unreasonably long.

Will my right hon. Friend consider specifying a date prior to the legislation from which it will be possible retrospectively to claim royalties if the House approves legislation on this matter?

I will consider what my hon. Friend said, but I know that he would not expect me to commit myself in any way this afternoon.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will give the cost, per pig, of all the pig subsidies paid for grade and deadweight baconers and other pigs, respectively, in the subsidy year 1960–61.

The average rate of guarantee payment is estimated to be about 6s. 7d. per score deadweight on baconers and about 4s. 11d. per score deadweight on other pigs. In addition, quality premiums averaging about 1s. 5d. per score have been paid on grade and deadweight baconers.

Can my hon. Friend say why one class of pig should be subsidised at a higher rate than another? Is he convinced that this is in the long-term interests of securing economic British bacon production?

My hon. Friend will know that there is essentially the same subsidy for all pigs, but in this country we have two separate markets—the pork market and the bacon market. It has happened recently that, since the returns of the pork market have been better, so the producers of the pork pigs have been making less of a call on the subsidy and support arrangements.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) what estimates the Forestry Commission has made of the total production of its forests in the years 1965, 1970, 1975, and 1980, respectively;

The Commission make long-term estimates of production at five-yearly intervals. The last was made in 1955 for the years 1965 and 1975; the 1960 estimates, which are now being prepared and will take us up to 1980, will be made available as soon as possible. The 1955 estimate, which is, of course, subject to revision, for total production for all woodlands and hedgerows in Great Britain is 92 million hoppus feet for 1965 and 125 million for 1975. From the Commission's own forests the current estimate is 30 million hoppus feet in 1965 and 55 million in 1975.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does not he agree that these increases are very remarkable, and indicate that both sides of the industry are doing their best to increase production? Does not he also agree that the increases will create problems? Will he study these problems and, in particular, help the timber trade in any way he can to solve them?

I agree with my hon. Friend. These are satisfactory figures, which reflect great credit on the timber growers. We will have to be careful to ensure that there are proper outlets, in order to see that supply does not exceed demand. The Commission is constantly investigating new outlets, such as pulp mills and board mills, for homegrown timber, and I do not think that there is any reason to suppose that supply will exceed demand in the end.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now make a statement on the calling of a conference of all the barley exporting countries.

Though at first sight attractive, a conference limited to barley-exporting nations would be open to obvious objections of private fixing and the like. So importing countries as well as exporting countries would have to participate. Moreover, the conference would have to cover other feed grains as well as barley. It would, in my view, be fruitless to press for such a conference unless there was a reasonable prospect of a successful outcome. The propects of this appear no better now than on previous occasions when this suggestion has been considered.

Although the weather and the Price Review have gone some way towards solving or mitigating our own domestic problem, is there not still a formidable world problem in barley? If the Minister will not call such a conference, what is he going to do about it?

We have been living and working with a free coarse grain trade for many years, and we consider that this is the right way to proceed.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what difference there has been in the amount of subsidy paid in respect of lime and its spreading since the higher contribution for summer liming was abandoned in favour of a flat rate all the year round.

The estimated subsidy expenditure for the year 1960–61, which finishes at the and of this month, is £81 million in respect of about 5½ million tons of lime. For the previous year the figures were £11 million in respect of 7 million tons of lime. The main reason for this fall was the very wet season which set in from the summer of last year and which hampered liming and, indeed, most farming operations.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how many rhinoceroses were imported into this country for zoos under Government licences in 1959 and 1960.

My right hon. Friend is not concerned with rhinoceroses.

I am sorry to hear that, in view of the fact that he is concerned with the importation of other forms of wild life into this country. In view of the blundering acts of one of his colleagues, will not he try to extend his activities to cover rhinoceroses?

I can set the hon. Member's mind at rest. No rhinoceros-borne diseases are a serious hazard to our own livestock. Hence the rhinoceros comes under a different category from the other animals about which the hon. Member asked Questions recently.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the cost to his Department of maintaining rabbit clearance areas; and what is the approximate amount by which the agricultural industry benefits from such action.

The Department's grants to rabbit clearance societies will amount to about £150,000 in this financial year. It is not possible to assess the benefit to agriculture from their operations.

Is the Minister aware that it was alleged that the denuding of the countryside of rabbits would result in a saving of £1 million to the agricultural industry? If that is assumed to be the case, where has this saving reflected itself? Is it in the wages of the agricultural worker, or in his working conditions?

There is little doubt—and anybody who knows the countryside well will bear me out in this—that the rabbit caused a very great deal of damage. No one wants to see it return. The disappearance of the rabbit has been reflected in greatly increased agricultural production in this country.

Will the hon. Gentleman take this opportunity of giving some credit to the agricultural co-operative organisations, which were entirely responsible far this clearance scheme?

I would not have thought that any one person or type of organisation could claim to be responsible for the disappearance of the rabbit from this country. Some of us have heard of myxomatosis, which has done nearly as much as the rabbit clearance societies, but all who have taken part in this valuable work deserve great credit.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he will now put into effect the recommendations of the Food Standards Committee on the quality of bread.

I have received many representations on the Food Standards Committee's Report on Bread and Flour and am considering them.

Zero hour was on 17th February last, well over a month ago. When shall we get something better than the doped cotton wool which now passes for bread? This matter has been going on for many years now. Are the Government going to do something about it?

I cannot accept in any way the implication contained in the hon. Member's supplementary question. As to the timing of the matter, as I told him when he last asked a Question on this subject, I asked for reports to be in by 17th February. That has been done. The reports will be considered, and I hope to be able to make a statement fairly shortly.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food how much the 17 per cent, of the United Kingdom's beef supplies imported from Argentina represented in weight and value last year; what is the estimated saving in cost, compared with home-produced meat; and what has been the average cost of dealing with foot-and-mouth disease outbreaks and paying compensation in the past five years.

Imports of beef from the Argentine in 1960 amounted to 204,000 tons, valued at £39 million, or £191 per ton. The guaranteed price for fat cattle to United Kingdom producers in that year was the equivalent of £285 per ton. Argentine imports, however, supplement rather than replace home production and, even with their help, beef consumption per head last year was well below the pre-war level. That is one of the reasons for the substantial increase in the guaranteed price for fat cattle following the Annual Price Review. Over the period 1956–60 compensation, together with the cost of slaughter, the disposal of carcases and the disinfection of premises has averaged just over £1 million per year.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that information. Has he noted that there was recently an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease among pigs at a Royal Air Force station which uses Argentine beef? Has he further noticed from Answers given by his right hon. Friends representing Service Departments that they cannot say how much Argentine beef is being used by the Service Departments. In view of what my right hon. Friend has said, will he give us that information? It seems that there may be a special risk attaching to the use of Argentine meat in Royal Air Force stations and Army units where personnel may not be as careful as they should be to sterilise the remains of food before feeding it to the pigs.

I am sure that my colleagues' attention will be drawn to the Question which my hon. Friend has put. I shall certainly make sure that their attention is drawn to it. As to the fact that they could not say what amount of Argentine beef was consumed by each Service, I understand that although the meat has to reach certain standards, it is left to the contractor to decide from what source the beef comes.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what action he is taking to encourage the production of improved British cheese, especially Cheddar.

With the encouragement of the Department, the industry in England and Wales operates grading schemes for both farmhouse and creamery cheese, including Cheddar cheese. Market prices generally reflect the gradings obtained, so that producers already have an incentive to improve the quality of their cheese.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the higher price ranges of the market are dominated by foreign imported cheeses? When shall we be able to get the good, well-matured British Cheddar which we used to get years ago?

I think the standards of of British cheeses are steadily rising. Though some people may not think British cheeses compare with some of the imported cheeses, others will say that they are just as good or even better. In the end, there is no accounting for taste.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food whether he is aware that over the last 10 years the proportion of the national income received by the agricultural industry has steadily declined; and what steps he is taking to stop this decline.

Yes, Sir. This is inevitable because with the increasing prosperity which the country has enjoyed these last 10 years the demand for other goods and services had risen faster than the demand for food. But the agricultural industry is in a sound condition and if any evidence were needed that the Government are determined to keep it so the recent Price Review provides it.

Would not it be very right and proper if the Minister, on behalf of the Government, told the members of the agricultural industry that it clearly is not true to say they have never had it so good?

Can my right hon. Friend say what is the income per head in agriculture compared with that of other industries, in this country, in France and, say, in the United States of America?

Yes, Sir, because the Food and Agriculture Organisation of United Nations conducted an inquiry into this a year or two ago, country by country. The proportion per head in agriculture for the United Kingdom was 80 per cent.; for France 60 per cent. and for Western Germany 70 per cent.

Is the Minister aware that the Government have actually legislated over a period for declining incomes and that the position of small farmers has deteriorated since they came to office?

No, it is the case throughout the Western world that as prosperity increases and income levels have been rising the amount spent on food is a lesser proportion than on consumer goods. This applies to Belgium, Denmark, Western Germany, the Netherland, Canada and the United States.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a further statement about Her Majesty's Government's proposals for regulating the solicitation of money deposits by companies from members of the public by advertisement and circulars.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is yet in a position to make a statement regarding the control of companies soliciting money from the public without security.

Work on a Bill for the regulation of companies which invite deposits from the public is proceeding and it may be possible to introduce it later this Session.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. In view of the fact that legislation in the current Session of Parliament was promised over a year ago and in the meantime a large number of depositors have apparently lost money by investing in some of these companies, will he do his utmost to make absolutely certain that a Bill is brought forward in the current Session?

I will proceed as fast as possible, but it is difficult to draft legislation to deal with this mischief without at the same time interfering with normal and proper methods of business.

I thank my right hon. Friend for his reply. Can he tell us whether in this Bill he will try to include not only the soliciting of money for deposits but, what is equally as bad and happens over a wide field, the soliciting of money for investments?

I think the question of soliciting money for the sale or purchase of shares is covered by existing legislation and by the Jenkins Committee. Regarding deposits, it will certainly cover the whole field.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in fact there are a number of small firms of stockbrokers, not in London but scattered over the provinces, who solicit money by post for very chancy investments, which is one of the abuses we are trying to stop?

If my hon. Friend will let me have details, I shall be glad to look into the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of the attempts still being made to circumvent the law relating to penalties in hire-purchase agreements by provisions for compensation for depreciation, he will now introduce legislation to prevent this practice.

The Committee on Consumer Protection has announced its intention of considering whether there should be further control of the terms of hire-purchase and credit-sale agreements. I would prefer to await their report.

As the particular case which I have in mind relating to a motor car hire-purchase agreement is sub judice I cannot comment on it. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to watch the position carefully with a view to introducing amending legislation?

I will certainly watch it carefully. I know the case in question, which, as the hon. Gentleman rightly says, is sub judice.

In view of the increasing number of references to the Malony Committee, would the President consider asking that Committee to publish interim reports, because if we are to wait for a comprehensive report covering all these things we shall have to wait for another two or three years?

I do not think the hon. Member need be quite so concerned. I do not think it is a question of an increasing number of references but of an increasing number of questions disclosing what the Committee is doing.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why he authorises Intertype, a wholly-owned American subsidiary in the United Kingdom, to instruct purchasers from some other countries wishing to buy its products to purchase them in the United States of America.

There is no question of my authorising or not authorising the actions of a private firm. The firm has a long order book and an excellent export record.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a letter such as I have described was sent by a wholly-owned American subsidiary to a firm wishing to buy these products and that the firm was instructed to buy in America at an extra cost of 5,000 dollars? Does he think this right? In view of the increasing number of wholly-owned subsidiary companies in this country, including Henry Ford, does he think it is right that such letters should be sent out, thus depriving British firms of work which otherwise they might do?

A firm can never instruct inquirers to buy somewhere else. This firm has and is consistently exporting over 60 per cent. of its output, which is a magnificent export record. It has a long order book and it is only reasonable that it should tell an inquirer that if he felt like it and wanted goods at an earlier date he could go elsewhere. That is only fair and reasonable, and as I say, this firm has an excellent record in exports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consideration he has given to the advantages and disadvantages of a duodecimal system in so far as it would affect the United Kingdom export trade.

I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to currency and I cannot add to the assurance my right hon. Friend the Minister of State gave him on 21st February that export considerations will be taken into account in the Government consideration of the question of adopting a decimal currency.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that if we adopted the duodecimal system we should be the only country using it and that it would seriously damage exports?

I am told that the last people to use the duodecimal system were the Babylonians, and I doubt whether we shall go back to that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will propose that the Consultative Committee to be set up by the European Free Trade Association, comprising trade union, employer and financial interests shall be enlarged to include representatives of the interests of organised distributors and consumers as well.

This Committee is designed to be a relatively small body of people who, acting as advisers in their personal capacity to the Council of the European Free Trade Association, will as a whole represent the main sectors of economic life in the member states. I am satisfied that the Committee as now composed will fulfil this purpose and I should not wish to suggest any addition to its numbers.

Do not the categories mentioned in my Question, namely, organised distributors and consumers, come within the definition of main sectors of economic life? Since, as the Minister has said, the formal decision says that the main sectors of economic life shall be represented, ought not these categories also to be represented?

If we start representing every sector—

No, only the main sectors.

—we shall run into immense problems. I am glad to say that one representative is Mr. Birch of U.S.D.A.W., who will, I hope, soon be well enough to take up his duties.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to improve the unfavourable balance of trade with Poland, especially in view of the fact that the value of meat, butter and dairy products imported from Poland exceeds that of all imports into Poland from the United Kingdom.

The unfavourable balance of trade to which my hon. Friend refers is one element in a payments position with Poland which is in favour of the sterling area as a whole and it would not be in our interests to try to balance our visible trade with Poland while ignoring other relevant factors.

Does not my right hon. Friend realise that the total value of British exports taken up by Poland is only just over £12 million, whereas the total value of agricultural imports, particularly meat and dairy products—largely pigs and pork—exceeds £18 million? When we are having to put up the guaranteed price for British producers in the Annual Price Review, does this make sense?

Visible exports are only part of the story. There are many invisibles, such as freight, insurance and debt repayments from Poland to the United Kingdom. Poland is short of sterling and uses currency obtained from trade with other countries to buy sterling to purchase within the sterling area.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, as Haltwhistle has been declared a designated area under the Local Employment Act, 1960, and Nenthead, which has a very high proportion of its male population unemployed, comes within the boundaries of the Haltwhistle exchange employment area, he will consult the Chairman of the National Coal Board about the effect of his refusal to issue a licence to permit the opening at Nenthead of a small semi-anthracite mine to provide employment for between 10 and 20 men.

While I should like to see employment provided in this area, the licensing of this mine is a matter for the National Coal Board.

While appreciating that Answer, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he is not responsible for the implementation of the Local Employment Act? Does he realise the absurdity of a situation in which there is a shortage of anthracite and semi-anthracite and when some representatives of the National Coal Board are talking about a shortage of miners, while in other areas, such as this, which have a high level of unemployment, the Board prevents the opening up of a very small mine? Is he aware that this is not the only one, and that there are other cases?

I am sure that the Chairman of the National Coal Board will have these factors very much in mind and that my hon. Friend's Question will serve to make them more publicly known.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why the Exports Credits Guarantee Department rejected the East German Government's order for steel rolling mills and certain other steel-making equipment.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of State to the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. A. Lewis) on 21st March.

I am terribly sorry, but I have not seen that reply. May I ask the right hon. Gentleman to repeat it for my benefit and for the benefit of the House? Will he do so?

The facts are that—

"—discussions on this project between the East German authorities and a United Kingdom firm are continuing."

"—wish to comment further on business which is still under negotiation."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 21st March, 1961; Vol. 637, c. 33.]

I am glad to know that the reports which were so widely spread a few days ago—I think last week—are not wholly accurate. Can I deduce from the right hon. Gentleman's reply that he is now taking a more sensible attitude towards trade with East Germany and that he has found a "Stout Cortez" in his ranks and has discovered and given existence to a country which the Government have so far failed to recognise?

Having quite rightly stated that certain newspaper reports were inaccurate, the hon. Gentleman now bases his supplementary question on the supposition that they were accurate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many British firms participated in the Leipzig Fair, 1961; what increase this represented over the previous fair; and what reports he has received of business done and inquiries received.

As my right hon. Friend the Minister of State said on 28th February, we are informed that 225 British firms exhibited; this total represents an increase of more than 55 per cent. over the corresponding figure for 1960. Preliminary information I have received indicates that most United Kingdom exhibitors were satisfied with the results they achieved and with the contacts made with senior representatives of Communist countries. In a few instances, disappointment has been expressed that some exhibits specifically requested by the East German authorities have not been sold and may have to be returned to the United Kingdom.

While my right hon. Friend cannot intervene, for obvious reasons, at Government level, will he take account of the complaints, some of which I have received myself, about the siting and nature of the British pavilions, which were most inadequate, unflattering and unhelpful to effective exhibition by many British firms, who this year attempted to expand their exports in this direction? While he cannot intervene with the East German authorities, will he somehow or other give help and advice to our industrialists on what can be done?

The reports I have seen show that many of our industries, particularly the steel industry, put up very effective exhibitions indeed. So far as I am concerned, the more trade we do with East Germany the better.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is becoming something of a farce, because when we go to see these fairs we find that most of the countries of the world are represented there—the United States and France and other Western powers—and that many of them have direct trade agreements with their own Governments, including, I think, Western Germany as well? Will he have a look at this matter again, instead of leaving it to the F.B.I., and also do something to facilitate air travel, because there was no direct B.E.A. flight from London, nor were any proper representations made by the Board of Trade? Cannot we have something done about that?

Our practice in this matter is exactly the same as that of other N.A.T.O. countries. The hon. Member should not take at their face value all the stories which come from the other side of the Iron Curtain.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why his Department has extended the suspension of Imperial Preference on butyl imported from Canada, which can once again supply all the requirements of British industry.

Butyl rubber was temporarily exempted from import duty from 1st October, 1960, and, as a result, the Commonwealth margin of preference was suspended. The exemption comes to an end on 1st April, 1961, and will not be extended.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that very satisfactory answer, may I ask him if he is aware that this industry in Canada was built up primarily during the war for the sole purpose of serving this country, but that powerful foreign interests have been trying very hard to undermine its position in the British market, which if they were allowed to succeed would be a complete negation of the spirit of the Ottowa Agreements? Can he assure the House that he will keep a weather eye on the position in the future?

Certainly, Sir. We suspended the Commonwealth margin of preference and exempted this product from duty because for a certain period the Canadian output was insufficient to meet United Kingdom demand. As soon as we found that there was enough coming from Canada we restored the position.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the accounts of the realisation comparies established under the Cotton Industry Finishing Reorganisation Schemes will be available for scrutiny by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

No, Sir. The realisation companies are companies limited by guarantee and have the normal obligation to file accounts with the Registrar of Companies where they are available for public inspection.

Does that Answer mean that there is no accountability to Parliament for the spending of Treasury funds, funds raised by private taxation or levy authorised by this House? Secondly, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that prices from two to three times the grant provided for under the formula in the Order have been agreed?

The position of these realisation companies is that they have a free hand to decide how much they will apply, because the whole of the extra cost of this inducement to close down is borne by the industry. In these circumstances, it is right that they should be treated as companies limited by guarantee. In the case of the Cotton Board, the accounts and records will be available for inspection by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

Is it not a fact that prices over and above that provided by Treasury grant are raised by a levy or by private taxation in the industry on firms remaining in the industry? In the case of the private levy authorised by Parliament, ought there not to be some accountability to Parliament for the money so raised?

The position is that there is accountability to Parliament for public money. Where the money is provided not by the public but by the industry, companies' accounts are available for public inspection.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that the Prinlaws Mills in Leslie, Fife, have been standing empty for a number of years and that this represents a high rating loss to the burgh of Leslie; and whether any offers have recently been made for the premises.

The Board has so far received no enquiries for the premises.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that these premises have stood empty for quite a long while and that the Leslie Burgh Council, which is quite a small authority, can ill afford to lose the money involved? Does he further realise that the employment facilities in the area are in any case very restricted? In these circumstances, will he and his Department do everything they can to advertise the very advantageous facilities offered by these mills and help the local authority to get a tenant?

I should certainly be very happy to see a tenant taking over these mills. As far as advertising is concerned, the hon. Member is certainly helping in that direction.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how much factory space is currently lying idle in the county of Fife; and what steps are being taken to secure tenants.

There is no obligation upon firms to report empty factory space to the Board of Trade, but the Controller for Scotland has knowledge of 423,080 square feet of factory space in Fife at present vacant. The Board continues to draw the attention of suitable industrialists to these empty premises.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether his advertising of these premises and others in the United Kingdom is any better than it was when the Estimates Committee reported on the complete inadequacy of the pamphlet issued by his Department to encourage foreign investors to come to this country? Is it not quite scandalous that there should be such an amount of factory space idle in Fife when the unemployment figures are so high?

No, Sir. We are quite content to be judged by the number of new jobs being created in Scotland at the present moment.

I am asking about Fife.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consideration he has given to the case for new industries submitted to him by the Northumberland County Council; what reply he has sent; and whether he will make a statement.

As I have told the county council, I have carefully studied the case it submitted to me and welcome its initiative in seeking to attract new industry.

Promises of that character are of little encouragement to the county as a whole. Is the Minister aware that in January this year nearly 3 per cent. of the total registered insured people were unemployed? Is he further aware that, in the main, this is a mining area and that the future of that industry is not very encouraging? Will he take immediate steps to give some basic encouragement to the people of the area?

One should not underestimate the prospect of the mining industry in this area. We keep in close touch with the National Coal Board about future plans. I should be happy to persuade other industrialists to go to the North-East, to Tyneside and Sunderland. We are getting a few to go, and I hope there will be more.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the redundancies and anticipated redundancies at the shipbuilding yards of J. Samuel White and Company Limited, of Cowes, Isle of Wight, he will now consider further applications for assistance under the Development Areas Treasury Advisory Committee from organisations wishing to develop in the Isle of Wight.

No, Sir. The jobs in prospect for the Isle of Wight should fully offset any unemployment which results from the redundancies to which my hon. Friend refers.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the implementation of the Local Employment Act in the Isle of Wight has been most successful so far? Is he also aware that 114 men received redundancy notices at Samuel White and Company this week and another 1,000 will do so before the end of the year? If I am able to prove to him that the statement he has just made is incorrect, will he reconsider his decision?

Of course I would, but my information, which I think is accurate, is that unemployment on the island is nearly 1 per cent. lower than it was a year ago and more than 1,200 jobs are in prospect. I shall, of course, watch the situation very closely, but I think my hon. Friend is possibly being a little over gloomy about the prospects in the island.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he is aware of the unemployment in the linoleum industry, due to recession in the home market; and whether he will take this factor into account when he is considering the rate of Purchase Tax which may be imposed on linoleum in the future.

I noticed the figures given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour in reply to the hon. Member's Question on 20th March, but I cannot comment on the taxation aspect of this matter at this stage.

Is the Minister aware that the figures given by the Minister of Labour on Monday indicated that unemployment in the linoleum industry in Kirkcaldy is now five times greater than in January this year? Is he aware that the manufacture of linoleum in Kirkcaldy is as important to the economy of that town as the manufacture of cars is to the Midlands? Will he press on the Chancellor of the Exchequer the importance of giving most careful consideration, when preparing his Budget, to the necessity of abolishing or reducing the 12½ per cent. Purchase Tax on linoleum and thus helping and encouraging the home market?

I think the hon. Member will know that Purchase Tax on linoleum was reduced from 30 per cent. to 15 per cent. in 1957 and to 12½ per cent. in 1959. I appreciate his concern, and I am sure my right hon. and learned Friend will take into account what he said this afternoon.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what, for 1961, is the estimated total taxation revenue derived from vehicles and vehicle drivers; and what, for 1961, will be the total Government expenditure on roads.

The latest available estimate relates to the financial year 1960–61. The figures are £645 million and £108 million, respectively. In addition, it is estimated that some £94 million will be spent on roads by local authorities, not counting about £25 million on lighting.

Is not the road user paying far more than his fair share of taxation? Would it not be very wrong to add tolls to the existing burden? Will the Treasury do what it can to speed up the creation of a proper road system in the country?

The question of tolls is another matter, but, as my hon. Friend realises, there is no connection between expenditure on roads and revenue derived from the road user. The revenue goes into the common pool and the amount spent on the roads depends on the assessment of the priorities having regard to the various demands on the country's economy.

Will my hon. Friend remember that the original idea behind the Road Fund was to create a fund which would be made use of to provide the roads of the country? May I repeat what my hon. Friend said, that it would be quite wrong for the Government to extract additional revenue from road users by means of a toll?

I am sure my right hon. and learned Friend will take note of that.

Will the hon. Gentleman inform his hon. Friends that the Road Fund has been abolished?

I assume that my hon. Friends realise that it was abolished in, I think, 1956.

To give a proper perspective to this Question, will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that over 70 per cent. of vehicles on the roads are chargeable wholly or in part to business accounts and that to conclude that this is taxation revenue is quite misleading because a great deal of the taxation revenue is never in fact received by the Treasury, as it is given back in allowances under Schedule D?

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will instruct the Governors of the Bank of England not to proceed at present with the construction of their building on the Wine Street site in Bristol, pending discussion of proposals for the comprehensive development of the site.

No, Sir.

Does the hon. Gentleman not appreciate that the erection of this building will utterly frustrate the comprehensive development of this site which perhaps is the most important clear urban site in England? Can he not ask a publicly-owned organisation like the Bank of England to make a gesture such as this in the public interest? Is he not aware that the widespread demand for comprehensive development is important?

I think the hon. Member will agree that this essentially is a matter for the Bank of England to deal with itself and not a matter in which it would be proper for my right hon. and learned Friend to intervene. I have made inquiries and I am informed that the plans for the building in question were prepared by a distinguished architect in full consultation with Bristol Corporation and that that corporation has given entire approval and permission for the building concerned.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what means he is testing public opinion on its attitude to decimal currency during the full consideration of this matter by Her Majesty's Government.

There are welcome signs of growing interest in this question and I think that public opinion is beginning to reveal itself without any intervention by the Government.

The more delay there is in deciding this question the more costly it becomes. When do the Government intend to make a decision, whichever way it goes, and act upon it?

As I said a few weeks ago, my right hon. and learned Friend hopes to make a statement later in the year.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will consider granting an increase in the pensions of retired school teachers.

The last Pensions (Increase) Act came into effect in August, 1959: under this, public service pensions, including those of teachers, were increased at the maximum by 12 per cent. My right hon. and learned Friend has no intention at present to introduce another such Bill.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply, but will he bear in mind that these percentage increases are totally inadequate in the case of the older retired teachers because of the very low basic pension on which they retired? Will my hon. Friend review the situation on grounds of equity and hardship?

We will, of course, look at that, but I would remind the House that successive Conservative Governments have introduced three pensions increase Measures since 1952, and that the 1959 Act was considerably more generous in several respects than its predecessors.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on his recent conversations with Sir Roy Welensky.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his discussions during the past week with Sir Roy Welensky regarding the proposed Constitution for Northern Rhodesia.

Sir Roy Welensky and I issued a joint statement before he left London last Monday. We said that we had had a valuable exchange of views about the Northern Rhodesia Constitution. But we made it clear that no attempt was made to carry out anything in the nature of negotiations. The House will, I am sure, welcome the agreement between us that detailed consultations with the various political groups should proceed at Lusaka.

While sympathising with the Prime Minister's difficulty in trying to control a party bitterly divided between the Colonial Secretary and Lord Salisbury—[Interruption.]—it is a very serious split, as hon. Members opposite know—could he say whether he has now decided to accede to Lord Salisbury's demand that the Colonial Secretary should go or that the concession is merely to be a watering down of the Colonial Secretary's proposals?

Neither.

Is the Prime Minister aware of the very great concern felt in Northern Rhodesia about the secret talks which took place last week and that the suspicions aroused are likely to undermine the success of the talks now to take place in Lusaka? When will he give details to the leaders of the political parties concerned in Northern Rhodesia of the actual results of discussions he had with Sir Roy Welensky?

The discussions were an exchange of views, as stated in the communiqué. Detailed discussions will continue as in the ordinary way after one of these conferences, with political groups all playing their rôle. What I fear is that there are some people who would like things to end in a row. I prefer them to end in agreement.

Can the Prime Minister give us an assurance that in his conversations with Sir Roy Welensky he gave no assurance that the British Government have changed their attitude in this matter and that he made no commitment to Sir Roy Welensky that any of his particular proposals would be discussed, let alone accepted?

As many proposals will, of course, be discussed as are put in by the leaders of the political groups. If the right hon. Gentleman will look at the communiqué, he will see that it is very precise. It says:

"The United Kingdom Government confirmed that they are prepared to consider any proposals within the framework and general spirit of the White Paper and the statements by Ministers in the House of Commons, which may be put forward by the political groups in Northern Rhodesia."

In view of the potentially dangerous situation in Northern Rhodesia, does not the right hon. Gentleman think it would be helpful if he issued an absolutely clear statement that at least there would not be any retreat from the proposals which the Colonial Secretary presented to the House of Commons?

The communiqué is perfectly clear, the situation is clear, and I repeat that what I think most hon. Members hope is that these matters will be resolved with general agreement in order that they should command general support throughout the territory.

Referring to the conference at Lusaka, are any proposals being put forward on behalf of Sir Roy Welensky? If not, is it clear that he cannot put proposals forward outside this conference which might affect it?

The proposals at Lusaka will be put forward by the leaders of the Northern Rhodesian groups. No doubt they will do so.

asked the Prime Minister whether, after his forthcoming visit to Japan, he will also visit Peking.

As my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary told the House on 8th February, I hope, if I can manage it, to visit Japan during the autumn. As to a visit to China, there is nothing that I can add to what I said in reply to Questions by my hon. Friend the Member for Tynemouth (Dame Irene Ward) on 8th December last.

Not knowing what my right hon. Friend said to my hon. Friend—

Shall I tell my hon. Friend?

—can my right hon. Friend confirm that the rumours which have been going round in the Far East that he would go to Peking are not, in fact, true, because it would cause a lot of unhappiness amongst people in the Far East that we might be about to lose face considerably, as Red China has not yet allowed an ambassador from us to its country and from them to us?

Visits of this kind, if they are to be useful, must be carefully timed. It is also sometimes wise before visiting a country to get an invitation to do so.

asked the Prime Minister what communication he has received from the President of the United States of America with regard to the subjects to be included in their forthcoming talks; and to what extent these include shipping.

I would refer my hon. Friend to my answer to the right hon. Member for Easington (Mr. Shinwell) on 14th February.

During my right hon. Friend's talks with the President of the United States, will he make it clear to the President that the persistent pursuit of policies which are bound to weaken the interests of its allies will do nothing in the long run to help the United States? Will he also indicate that America's sustained refusal to compromise or even consider this vital British interest is arousing a good deal of well justified concern in this country? The best foundation for an alliance is not the maxim, "Heads I win, tails you lose".

I will, of course, note what my hon. Friend has said, and I am well aware of the great importance of this question to British interests.

Will my right hon. Friend draw to the attention of the President of the United States the fact that the subsidies allowed by the United States to the two large American passenger liners operating on the North Atlantic route have compelled us to subsidise the building of the new Cunarder in order to avoid allowing the Americans to dominate the North Atlantic passenger trade?

The whole question of subsidy is a very difficult one, and I take note of what my hon. Friend has said.

Does not the Prime Minister realise that the action taken by American shipping interests, unless suppressed or arrested in some way, is calculated to destroy the efficacy and efficiency of the British Mercantile Marine? We surely cannot expect our friendship with the United States of America to remain as it is unless American shipping interests realise that we are an ally and in some respects in partnership with them.

Yes. Those are the arguments which we have tried to advance.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will introduce legislation to raise the salary of the First Lord of the Treasury.

No, Sir.

While many people might agree with the Prime Minister that he personally is not worth more than Dr. Beeching, does not he think that the dignity of his office demands that it should be given a status at least nearly equivalent to that of the Chairman of the Railways Board? Is he not aware that the Minister of Transport has made it clear that there will be many more appointments in the new Railways Board at salaries above that paid to the Prime Minister? Is it not time that the salaries of all Cabinet Ministers, which were fixed in 1831, were brought up to date?

While I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman for his care of my financial needs, he rather spoiled the delicacy of his approach by the way in which he introduced his last supplementary question.

asked the Prime Minister when he expects to be in a position to make a statement about the appointment of a Minister of Overseas Aid.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the statement that I made in the House on Tuesday about the new Department for Technical Co-operation. I assume that this covers the point he has in mind.

asked the Prime Minister what steps he proposes to take to give effect to the disarmament policy agreed upon at the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' Conference.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will now seek to discuss with President Kennedy and Mr. Khrushchev the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' disarmament proposals.

In future discussions on disarmament in the United Nations or elsewhere Her Majesty's Government, and no doubt other Commonwealth Governments, will be guided by the principles set out in the statement by the Prime Ministers. As to discussions with President Kennedy and Mr. Khrushchev, I have no arrangements to see Mr. Khrushchev. No doubt I shall be discussing with President Kennedy, among many other subjects, the next step to be taken in the field of disarmament.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the proposals made by the Commonwealth Prime Ministers represent a significant advance on any previous Western proposals, in that they propose that disarmament should be continuous, rapid and subject to a precise timetable, and that control should be instituted simultaneously with actual disarmament and not before? Will not the Prime Minister now put forward detailed British plans based on these principles in order to facilitate the possibility of real agreement?

No. The proper course is to take up negotiations as to the forum in which the disarmament committee or committees shall now meet.

Does not the Commonwealth Prime Ministers' communiqué urge that the principal military Powers should resume disarmament negotiations without delay? If it is true that negotiations are not to be resumed until 1st August, as has been suggested by President Kennedy, is it not highly desirable that direct discussions should take place with Mr. Khrushchev in the meanwhile on the proposals contained in the communiqué?

No. I think that everybody will agree that, whatever the date may be—I think the American Government will wish to be as swift as they can—these negotiations to be fruitful must include the greatest armed State in the world, the United States.

In the meantime, will the Prime Minister ensure that the declaration of the Commonwealth Prime Ministers is circulated to the delegations to the United Nations Assembly now in session?

Yes. The right hon. Gentleman has asked me to do that already. I ask him to forgive me if I have not written to him about it. I will certainly see that it is dealt with before I leave tomorrow.

May I ask the Prime Minister to realise that I was not suggesting the exclusion of the United States Government? I asked him this. Pending the resumption of the negotiations on 1st August, would it not be a good thing to enter into discussions with Mr. Khrushchev as well as with the American President?

I should be very doubtful of the wisdom of that. We must proceed with our American allies and the other great States of the West.

asked the Prime Minister if he will now appoint a Minister of Sport; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir. But the Government are considering as effective but less spectacular ways and means of helping sport.

In view of welcome novelties such as Russian horses in the Grand National, does not the Prime Minister agree that every effort should be made to keep up Britain's score in sport, as in politics and economics, as other nations are doing?

Yes, and the question could not have been asked by anyone better than the hon. and learned Gentleman, who has the honour of having ridden a horse fifth in the Grand National.

asked the Prime Minister whether he has considered the proposal for a new status of association outside the Commonwealth, as outlined by the Expanding Commonwealth Group in their recent publication, Expanding Obligation, a copy of which has been sent to him; and having regard to Dr. Verwoerd's decision to withdraw South Africa's application for continued membership of the Commonwealth, when he expects to make a further statement on relations between the United Kingdom and South Africa.

I have read the interesting suggestions in the publication to which my hon. Friend refers. With regard to the second part of the Question, I would refer to what was said yesterday by my right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary and myself.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that this is of immediate importance, not only in respect of the Union of South Africa, but also in respect of countries like Somalia? Bearing in mind that all the Commonwealth Prime Ministers have had copies of this publication, will he institute consultations with the Commonwealth Prime Ministers on this problem?

No. I have read these proposals and I think that they have considerable interest and possibilities, but I do not think I can commit myself further today.