asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many individuals or firms, during each of the past three years, have disclosed that they make a business of seeking capital gains on the Stock Exchange or in property or other deals; and how much Income Tax, Surtax and Profits Tax, respectively, has been paid on the profits from such activities.

This information is not available.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman not aware that a large number of people are making capital gains in this way, and that there is strong evidence that many are making a living at it? In these circumstances, and in view of the very strong language that the Chancellor himself used in his Budget speech about enforcing the law against such people, and his saying, rather grandiloquently, "This is the law", does he not think that there is some obligation on him to show to the House that the Income Tax law is being enforced?

My Answer was that the particular information for which the hon. Gentleman asked is not available. Of course, the Inland Revenue is making every endeavour to enforce the law. As for the general point, whether it was grandiloquent or not, I stand by what I said in my Budget speech.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what consideration he has given to the advantages of a system of decimal coinage in facilitating the alteration, by rebate or surcharge, of Purchase Tax and Excise duties.

I have given no specific consideration to the advantages of a decimal coinage system in this connection.

Has my right hon. and learned Friend realised that this would be most helpful to his staff and, more important, to consumers?

I am told that in this case it is not thought that it would make very much practical difference. Nevertheless, I do not want my hon. Friend to think that that means that I am not very interested in the matter to which he is so much attached.

My right hon. and learned Friend has, I know, the whole question of the introduction of decimal currency in consideration. Can he tell us when he thinks that it may be possible for him to make an announcement in the matter, particularly as so many Commonwealth territories have now introduced decimal currencies?

I do not think that I could give my hon. Friend even an estimate without notice, but I will consider the matter and try to let him know.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give an assurance that the increased grants in aid, which he intends to make available to support the repertory theatre movement in this country, will be made available, in accordance with their needs, artistic standards, and public value, to all repertory theatres whether profit distributing or not; and whether he will make this principle clear to the Arts Council before it finalises the proposals which he has requested it to make to him on this subject.

No, Sir. It is a fundamental principle of Arts Council policy that its grants and guarantees are available only to non-profit-distributing companies.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that the drama derives a good deal of support, inspiration and personnel from the repertory theatre movement? Will he do all he can to foster it?

I certainly will do all I can to foster the repertory movement. With regard to the case of profit-distributing companies, I would be very grateful if my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Knutsford (Sir W. Bromley-Davenport) would put before me any facts about their situation.

Is the Chancellor aware that his statement, when turning down the National Theatre project, that he was to give support to provincial theatres, has caused a great deal of confusion as to the exact form in which that assistance will be made available? Will he ask the Arts Council to expedite its consideration of the matter because, meanwhile, theatres in the provinces are closing at the rate of one or two every week?

I do not admit that there is confusion. I am very surprised at the hon. Gentleman's statement that provincial theatres are closing at the rate of one or two every week; I do not believe that to be the case. However, I am certainly not out of sympathy with his suggestion. I think that it is important that we should establish the position as quickly as possible.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what plans he has, apart from unemployment benefit, for compensating workers who are removed from their employment as a result of the operation of his proposals for regulating labour supply, in cases where they fail to obtain suitable employment.

I have no plans for special compensation of the sort suggested by the right hon. Gentleman. The employment situation would, of course, be borne in mind before using this instrument, if the power to use it is granted by the House. Its effect in the way suggested would be one of the primary considerations in deciding whether or not to use it.

Is it not surprising that the Chancellor has a scheme, but no plan to go with it? What is to be the position of a man who is deliberately pushed out of employment by the application of the Chancellor's payroll policy, in contrast to someone who loses his employment because of a trade recession? Surely, if a man becomes unemployed as a result of Government policy, he is entitled to some additional consideration.

No, Sir. I think that the House has to face the fact that with any kind of economic regulator there is bound to be hardship in certain cases. It is quite pointless to think otherwise, or to try to persuade people that there will not be hardship. I certainly admit that there would be hardship in certain circumstances in this instance, and that hardship would be one of the primary considerations to be borne in mind in deciding whether to use the regulator.

But does not the Chancellor realise that this is not a question of hardship, but of economic waste as a result of making people unemployed? Can he not give an assurance that this payroll surcharge will not be applied in areas that are development districts under the Local Employment Act?

I am not prepared to give such an assurance at present. This must be a weapon to be kept in reserve.

Does that mean that when the Government, as a result of the application of their policy, deliberately cause hardship, no compensation is to be provided to the person who is the victim of that policy?

When the hire-purchase restrictions were put on, they caused hardship.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will publish in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing for each of the last 15 years the total national income, the total of all Government and local government expenditure, and the percentage the latter is of the former.

Yes, Sir. With permission, I will circulate the table in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

While thanking my right hon. and learned Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he will be good enough to consider publishing these figures on an annual basis, so that the country as a whole can see whether Government expenditure in relation to national income is being contained or otherwise? Would he now say whether those figures show, as a trend, a decrease or an increase?

They show a varying trend—the figures are from 1946 onwards—but, as I think I have said, the last three years show an upward trend. I think that the answer to the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question is also "Yes, Sir".

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will now make possible the opening of the Reading Room in the British Museum for five nights a week.

No, Sir. I have nothing to add to the replies I gave to the hon. Member for St. Pancras, North (Mr. K. Robinson), on 21st February.

Has not the right hon. and learned Gentleman noticed that the Reading Room is in future to close at 9 o'clock instead of at 9.30? Secondly, does he really believe that one of the greatest libraries in the world should be denied to people who have time only in the evenings, especially as about 100 are still there at 9 o'clock each night when the Reading Room is open?

I have had a report on the matter. Not all the evidence tends the same way as the hon. Member suggests, but, as I have said before, I propose to give this experiment a full trial and then decide whether it should be extended or continued.

In comparison with the very large figures that we were debating last week, would the Chancellor of the Exchequer say what would be the cost of doing what my hon. Friend asks? While taking note of what the right hon. and learned Gentleman said in his Budget speech about candle ends, may I ask whether this candle end is not rather too small for him to be chasing after when there are far bigger ones that he is not chasing after?

If the right hon. Gentleman gives me notice of that, I will consider the size of the candle end.

Will the Chancellor also bear in mind that while every user of the Reading Room greatly appreciates the efficiency, courtesy and ability of the staff, it still takes nearly an hour and a half to get a book at the Reading Room as compared with twelve or fifteen minutes at the Bibliothèque Nationale?

I will take note of the hon. Gentleman's point.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will include in the Finance Bill provisions for special reliefs in respect of the costs of children's education and of personal saving for married men whose gross earned income does not exceed £5,000 a year.

No, Sir.

In view of the Chancellor's statement last week about the difficulty of a man earning £5,000 a year being able to provide for the education of his children and to save, may I ask him, first, whether he is assuming that all Surtax payers send their children to fee-paying schools, or, in his calculation, does he envisage some extension of fee-paying? Secondly, if it is so difficult for a man earning £5,000 a year to provide for the education of his children and to save, has the Chancellor any proposals for helping those earning £2,000 a year or less? [HON. MEMBERS: "£1,750."] Is not their difficulty even greater?

As to the first part of his supplementary question, I think that the hon. Gentleman is quite right; I was basing my remark on the assumption that they would send their children to a fee-paying school or, under the university grant system, would pay a substantial amount for university education.

As to the way in which I try to help them, there will be some assistance to them and to others in certain income groups lower than that in my proposals, but I will say this to the hon. Gentleman. There was a certain amount of laughter when I made the remark about the £5,000-a-year man not being rich, but I am not certain that people would laugh quite so much if they realised that the net income of a man earning £5,000 a year gross before my changes is equivalent to the net income of a man earning £1,400 a year gross in 1937, and £770 gross in 1912.

But after all these calculations, is it not a simple fact that that man's net income after taxation is still a good deal higher than the net income after taxation of a man earning £2,000, £1,500, or £1,000 a year? Is not that a fairly obvious point? If that is true, and if there are all these difficulties at the £5,000-a-year level, why does not the Chancellor address himself to the obviously greater difficulties of those on a much lower level of income, including old-age pensioners?

Substantial efforts have been made to alleviate the problem for lower-income groups in the past—[HON. MEMBERS: "Oh."]—certainly they have—and this time my proposals will deal with Surtax payers.

Is the Chancellor aware that this remark of his has greatly interested the miners working at the Barony Colliery, Auchinleck, in my constituency? Will he come to Auchinleck and address the miners there on the difficulties of those earning £5,000 a year?

No, except in so far as they may understand my plan, because, irrespective of the way they cast their votes, they are people of great political sense.

Does not the Chancellor think that it is also difficult for those on £1,000 a year to survive under his administration?

I should not think it is anything like as difficult as it was under the administration of night hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the estimated additional amount of Profits Tax that will have to be paid by building societies.

Approximately £½ million.

Is it not obvious that if this extra Profits Tax is charged on building societies already operating on fairly narrow margins, about 2¼ million borrowers from those societies will have to pay higher rates of interest? Will the Chancellor bear in mind that ½ per cent. increase on a mortgage on a £2,000 house is equivalent to 11s. 8d. a month? Has he in mind the hardships that may be entailed for those 2¼ million borrowers?

The point is that the Royal Commission recommended that building societies should pay Profits Tax, and should be charged Profits Tax on the same basis on which other concerns are charged. I do not see my way to making an exception.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will recommend to the National Research and Development Corporation that it should consider the needs of areas of unemployment for new industry when investing in new industrial projects.

My right hon. Friend is asking the Corporation to bear this consideration in mind, although he thinks that in practice there is little scope for it to help.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the development announced in the recent Report of the National Research and Development Corporation on investing in a number of shares in a new company making printed electrical circuits was welcomed by very many who would like to see an extension of State enterprise in this direction, and that one would hope that the President of the Board of Trade, in putting forward this suggestion to the Corporation, would particularly emphasise the needs of Scotland, where there is a dearth of science-trade industries?

I am sure that that is one of the considerations which the National Research and Development Corporation will have in mind, although as the hon. Lady is clearly aware, most of its expenditure is development expenditure on a contract basis in collaboration with existing firms or research institutions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the continued identical tendering of firms to local authorities for lamps; and what evidence he has received of monopoly conditions in the lamp manufacturing industry in the course of considering further references to the Monopolies Commission.

The prices indicated in the schedules of tenders for electric lamps sent to my right hon. Friend by the hon. Member are by no means all identical. Since the Monopolies Commission reported in 1951, the Board of Trade have received very few complaints about the supply and prices of electric lamps.

The information which the hon. Member has sent gives my right hon. Friend no reason to think that in this industry the conditions to which the Act of 1948 applies prevail, but he will be glad to consider any further evidence which the hon. Member may wish to bring to his notice on this point.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that in the list submitted to him by the Stoke-on-Trent Council there was identical tendering except in two cases? Is not that sort of thing happening time and time again, resulting in the expenditure of large sums of money by a public authority which is endeavouring to light its streets properly? Has not the time come for a review of this matter?

In the list that I saw there were at least two firms which were prepared to offer electric lamps below the general level of prices, and one was offering them at above that level. In one case, a firm was offering some above and some below.

As I have said, if the hon. Lady has any evidence of the existence of an agreement, it ought to be brought to the attention of the Registrar of Restrictive Trading Agreements.

As my hon. Friend has already brought this information to the attention of the hon. Gentleman, is it not his duty to pass it on to the Registrar?

That is what I am suggesting to the hon. Lady—that she should pass it on, because it is open to anybody to do so. We have no evidence whatever of the existence of any such agreement. If anyone has any evidence, it is up to him to pass it on to the Registrar.

If it is open to anybody to do so, and the Parliamentary Secretary has had the information from my hon. Friend and the local authority, is there not a duty on him to make it available to the Registrar?

No, Sir, because, as I have said, there is no indication, from the evidence submitted, that there is any such agreement.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what reply he has sent to the communication sent to him by a Leicester knitwear company, which last year exported 37½ per cent. of its total production as against 12 per cent. exported by the whole trade, complaining that its exports were shut out suddenly by new import restrictions imposed by an overseas Government, and that two other markets had been partially lost by new restrictions; if he will make representations to get these restrictions removed; and if he will make a statement.

I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to the case which he mentioned in his speech in the House on the 22nd February and on which I made some observations later in the debate on that day. I have since discussed the complaints fully with the head of the firm concerned. The restrictions apply to imports from all sources and do not discriminate against those from the United Kingdom, nor are they contrary to the international obligations of the countries concerned. We shall continue to do all we can to help our exporters, but to urge other countries to import goods which they cannot afford benefits neither them nor us.

What I am proposing to my right hon. Friend is that where a foreign country arbitrarily and suddenly excludes all imports without giving traders notice, and at times shuts out goods which are on the ocean, actually in transit, he should use his power to say to them that if they do that to our goods we shall use the same powers to stop the stuff which they send to us. Is he aware that the trade could do with some help of that kind, and, if so, will he provide it?

We make representations, whenever import cuts are arbitrarily made, to ensure that goods already in transit are allowed into the country and paid for, but it would not be fair for us to try to go further than that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that tenders received by local authorities for cement supplied by members of the Cement Makers Federation are often identical; and if, in view of this evidence of monopoly conditions and in view of the completion of consideration of agreements relating to cement prices by the Restrictive Practices Court, he will now refer this industry to the Monopolies Commission for examination.

My right hon. Friend is aware that tenders for cement are usually identical, no doubt as a result of the Cement Makers' Federation Agreement. This Agreement has recently been found by the Restrictive Practices Court to be consistent with the public interest. Agreements subject to the jurisdiction of that Court are outside the purview of the Monopolies Commission.

Does not that kind of Answer make nonsense of the whole question of monopoly? Is it not obvious that in one case the answer is that nothing can be done because there is not identical tendering, and that in this case, when there is, the answer is that it is consistent with the law and is, therefore, in the public interest? Does not the hon. Member agree that every local authority—to whom the Government make grants—is affected by this kind of ring?

There are two distinct cases. One is the monopoly where there is one person involved. The other is where several persons are involved and where there is an agreement among them. The Court found that the agreement resulted in cement prices being fixed at a reasonable level and that the public interest was, therefore, in no way damaged.

Does not the hon. Member realise that that is in absolute contradiction to the argument which hon. Members opposite continually put to us when they say that we must have competition? Is not this a case in which there is absolutely no competition because there is an agreement to have none?

I think that the hon. Lady will recognise that price competition is not the only form of competition.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what help he has given to the four British trade missions now fact-finding in South-East Asia, under the leadership of Sir Edward Thompson; who will represent him at the conference to be held in Singapore; if he will be seeing the delegation on their return; if bigger long-term credits will be available; what restrictions prevent low-priced goods from South-East Asia being imported into the United Kingdom; what requests he has received from the governments of South-East Asian countries for action to stabilise raw material prices; and if he will make a statement.

As the Question asked by my hon. Friend raises a number of points which cannot be answered briefly I will, with permission, circulate the Answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

When this team makes its report on conditions in South-East Asia and makes recommendations about the steps which could be taken to increase our exports to that area, will my right hon. Friend promise that his Department will then give serious consideration?

I assure my hon. Friend that we will very closely study the recommendations. The report is to be made to British industry and commerce and also to Her Majesty's Government.

Will it be published?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the continuing importance of earning foreign currency, he will ask the United States Government to reopen facilities, now closed, for British cars to be sold on United States bases and for United States Service personnel to retain British cars for more than a year free of Purchase Tax prior to export.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which I gave to my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Warwick and Leamington (Mr. Hobson) on 18th April.

When my hon. Friend is making representations to the American authorities on this subject, will he bear in mind that traders have been earning about £1½ million worth of dollars a year by selling cars to the Americans? Will he point out to the Americans that it is rather unfair that only American cars can be sold on these bases and that that is contrary to the spirit of the message of President Kennedy to Congress when he said, "Protectionism is no answer to our problems"?

The United States Government have not imposed a direct ban on the purchase of British cars by United States Service men. My right hon. Friend has made known to the United States Government his concern about the matter.

Was there any consultation between the American and British Governments before this ban was instituted—I know that it is not an absolute ban—on the sale of British cars through the PX? Is not this an arbitrary action and should there not have been consultation?

There was no consultation, but we were informed of the decision.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the number of new jobs likely to be available in the Blyth constituency during the next six months.

In the combined employment exchange areas of Bedlington Station, Blyth and Seaton Delaval, which comprise most of the hon. Member's constituency, expansions by local firms should produce about 700 new jobs over the next three or four years. I cannot say how many of these will become available during the next six months.

I thank the hon. Member for the figures and the slight encouragement which they give to the area, but does he not realise, from the visits which he and his right hon. Friend have paid to my constituency, that something bold and imaginative is required to tackle the problems of the area? Will he consider scheduling the south-east of Northumberland as a development district?

This matter is under constant consideration, but the present figures of unemployment do not justify my right hon. Friend in deciding that it comes within the terms of the Local Employment Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what new jobs have been made available in the Blyth constituency during the years 1958, 1959, and 1960.

In the employment exchange areas of Bedlington Station, Blyth and Seaton Delaval together, three industrial building schemes were completed in the three years 1958, 1959 and 1960. Blyth "A" power station was also completed within this period. The employment provided by these four schemes is over 400.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that Answer merely adds weight to the comments which I made in my supplementary question on the previous Question?

It also adds weight to my reply, because it still remains a fact that the average rates of unemployment over the year were 1·4 per cent. for Bedlington Station, 2·5 per cent. for Blyth, and 3·1 per cent. for Seaton Delaval.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the continued closure of cinemas and the resulting predominance of two major circuits, he will reconsider the question of introducing a different and higher level of British quota for these circuits, compared with other cinemas.

My right hon. Friend has no power under the Films Act, 1960, to prescribe a different and higher level of quota for circuit cinemas.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that this suggestion was made when the quota legislation was last revised and that a request by the President of the Board of Trade for legislative power to do this would be welcome? If we are to maintain the level of British film production with fewer outlets as cinemas close, it is necessary to have a higher quota. In view of the predominant position of the two major circuits, is it not ridiculous to continue with a situation in which the two major circuits have only the same quota as the remaining and smaller cinemas?

It is a fact that the two circuits are achieving a higher quota, but the reasons why this suggestion was rejected at the time remain valid.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent increased supplies of butter in recent weeks are responsible for the fall in United Kingdom prices; from which countries additional quantities are coming; and what evidence he has of export subsidies, direct or indirect, which could be countered by anti-dumping duties in the interests of the home producer, New Zealand and other regular suppliers.

Most butter prices in the United Kingdom have fallen in the last six months, against a background of increasing supplies from home production and higher imports from various countries, including Argentina, France and the Republic of Ireland. The fall in prices has been causing concern to supplying countries and international discussions of the problem have been taking place.

As regards the last part of the Question, it would not be appropriate for me to anticipate the consideration which would be given to an application under the Customs Duties (Dumping and Subsidies) Act, 1957, if one were made.

Are these discussions proceeding and, if so, will they be brought to a conclusion soon? Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that the Board of Trade will keep a constant watch on doubtful practices pursued by some countries to stimulate their exports of butter and eggs to this country and ensure that his Department is ready to act as soon as circumstances warrant?

The discussions have been useful and a number of recommendations have been made, including that the traditional suppliers to the United Kingdom should send only normal amounts and that others should avoid exporting to the United Kingdom. I think that we should see how those recommendations work out. We are keeping our eyes wide open on this matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will refer the colour film processing industry to the Monopolies Commission.

My right hon. Friend will bear the hon. Member's suggestion in mind when considering possible new references to the Monopolies Commission, and he will gladly consider any relevant information the hon. Member cares to send him.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that representations have been made in the past two years to the Monopolies Commission, but that, so far, nothing has been done? Is he aware that the two large firms are now marketing their films in such a manner as to have complete monopoly? Are not the representations of the trade worthy of consideration?

My right hon. Friend has received only one representation—from Glasgow—on this subject, but he would be very glad to receive further information from the hon. Member.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this matter has been mentioned in two reports of the Monopolies Commission itself?

No, I was not aware of that, but I shall certainly look into the matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proposals he has to relieve general unemployment and also provide a reasonable choice of occupation for juveniles in such villages as Cockfield, Woodlands, Middleton-in-Teesdale, Eggleston, Stairdrop, Copley and Butterknowle in the Bishop Auckland constituency.

My right hon. Friend would be glad to see suitable further employment provided in all these villages. In those of them which are in the Bishop Auckland development disstrict the facilities of the Local Employment Act are available.

How many factory sites in these villages, or within two miles of them, are known to the hon. Gentleman's Department? Since the passing of the Local Employment Act, how many industrialists have been taken to any of these places?

I should require notice of both those rather particular questions.

Is not that a comment on the lack of energy of the Board of Trade? There is a serious problem for nearly all these villages, yet the Parliamentary Secretary does not seem to know what the facts are. Will he instruct his Department at least to investigate the position?

The records for which the hon. Gentleman is asking would need some compiling. I did not think it necessary to take them out to answer his Question, but if he asks, I will try to get him the information.

Will not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that, according to his Answer, we are spending a lot of money under the Local Employment Act and we are now to spend more public money, through the payroll tax, to ensure that the work of the Act is not effective? Will the hon. Gentleman look into that?

I shall certainly consult my right hon. and learned Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the recent increased unemployment in Aberdeen, resulting in diminution in Great Britain's productivity, exports, and intake of foreign currency; and, in view of his responsibility for development areas, if he will consult with the Secretary of State for Scotland and the Minister of Labour with a view to rectifying this situation.

My information is that, despite some recent redundancies, unemployment in Aberdeen is decreasing. Nevertheless, my right hon. Friend would be glad to see more industry going there; he keeps in close touch with his right hon. Friends on this matter.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that there have been a number of dismissals at Messrs. Hall, Russell's shipyard and other places in Aberdeen and that one good way of rectifying the grave situation would be by a fair distribution of existing industry and by publicising the excellent shipyards and other works in Aberdeen which are available for the relevant industries?

The hon. and learned Member himself does a very good job in publicising Aberdeen's shipbuilding facilities, but the fact remains that unemployment in Aberdeen has been dwindling and that the average for the area is lower than the average for Scotland.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many applications for aid have been made to the Board of Trade Advisory Committee from West Dunbartonshire; and how many have been granted.

Applications have been received from seven firms. Three have been offered assistance—though one has refused the offer—three have been rejected, and one is still under consideration.

That means that so far none has been given any assistance. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that recently, when he was kind enough to meet a deputation from my constituency in which the assistance of the Board of Trade was offered, B.O.T.A.C. was, on the same day, turning down an application from a firm in my constituency, which was to extend an application which I had vetted and which I felt was one which could be accepted?

In view of the fact that that application has been turned down, the firm is likely to go out of business. Can the hon. Gentleman say whether anything further can be done by the Board of Trade? Surely he ought to do something, because it is now being widely said that the only firm which is successful in getting an application granted is one which does not require assistance.

I believe that the other two which were offered assistance have accepted it and, therefore, it will be forthcoming.

I will look into the second part of the question and consider whether anything can be done, but, as has been pointed out, the Board of Trade Advisory Committee makes recommendations and our powers are only to accept the recommendations for assistance or to refuse them. The Board of Trade has no power itself to override the Board of Trade Advisory Committee.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware of the delay in determining the financial assistance that can be given under the provisions of the Local Employment Act; and what proposals he has to eliminate such delays.

There was certainly delay last year while the Advisory Committee was disposing of a considerable backlog of cases submitted under previous legislation. But, once the applicant has submitted up-to-date accounts and other necessary information, cases are now dealt with in about two months.

Not only were delays taking place last year, but even during the present year. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman is aware that all the organisations in Scotland which are engaged in attracting new industries to Scotland are absolutely disgusted at the unwarrantable delays taking place. Will the hon. Gentleman look further into the matter and see that some definite improvement takes place?

I think that the hon. Member is exaggerating somewhat, to say the least. The main delay which takes place is as a result of the difficulty that some applicants find in preparing the information, getting their statement of accounts, and sending in with an estimate of their business prospects. Once all that is before the Board of Trade Advisory Committee, the delay, as I say, averages about two months.

Would my hon. Friend agree that some of the supplementary questions regarding assistance under the Local Employment Act are giving a completely wrong impression in the country? Would he agree that in most constituencies his Department is working extremely well and that they are finding that the Act to be of great benefit to them?

I am much obliged to my hon. Friend. The fact is that about £14 million of grants and loans have been offered in Scotland under the existing Act.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received from the Scottish Council, Development and Industry concerning the arrangements for deciding the financial assistance to be given to firms wishing to go to scheduled areas of high un employment under the Local Employment Act, 1960; and what reply he has sent.

None, Sir. The second part of the Question, therefore, does not arise.

Will the hon. Gentleman ask his right hon. Friend to consult the Secretary of State for Scotland, who has received representations from the Scottish Council, which claims that hundreds of jobs have been lost in Scotland because of the delays under this Act? Is not this sufficiently important for the Board of Trade to put itself to some bother about the delays, to get the information, and then take some steps about it?

I do not think that the hon. Member is entirely correct. The comparison that is being made is between the Local Employment Act and assistance which can be offered in Northern Ireland, but the Local Employment Act applies throughout Great Britain. It is the same everywhere. The jobs have not been lost in Scotland because of B.O.T.A.C. delays.

Has the Board of Trade asked the Scottish Council if it wishes the Government's new payroll tax to apply to Scotland? If not, will the Board of Trade do so?

I prefer to await any further announcement my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer may have to make.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent it is the policy of Her Majesty's Government mutually to agree with other countries to amend existing agreements connected with giving tax concessions to exporters; and what factors limit the pursuit of such a policy.

The policy of Her Majesty's Government is to secure the elimination of export subsidies and to this end we have sought to strengthen the international rules which restrict the grant of tax concessions for exports. This policy enjoys the support of organised industry.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that in the event of our thinking it worth while to introduce a tax concession there would be nothing wrong in approaching other countries which would be affected to agree mutually to alter the internal terms?

I would not care to answer a question as hypothetical as that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what international agreements affecting exports have been amended in recent years with the agreement of Her Majesty's Government.

I understand that my hon. Friend has in mind the international agreements relating to the use of tax concessions and other financial aids to export. Changes designed to strengthen the international rules against artificial aids to exports have been made both in O.E.E.C. and G.A.T.T. The E.F.T.A. Convention also includes similar provisions. The most important changes were those introduced with the agreement of the United Kingdom Government, during 1960.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in this instance I have not in mind only tax concessions? Could he tell the House whether or not at any time there has been an amendment of an international agreement of any sort, not only those covering tax concessions?

My hon. Friend's supplementary question goes so much wider than his original Question that I should like to see it on the Order Paper.

I think that my Question is quite clear. It refers to international agreements and does not specify any particular sort of agreement.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science if he will give the latest information available to him regarding the content of strontium 90 in children's bones.

The latest information available regarding the content of strontium 90 in children's bones is contained in the Medical Research Council's Monitoring Report No. 1, published in December, 1960.

Does not that Report show that, despite assurances that the level would fall following the suspension of tests three years ago, it was still rising and, in the case of one child, was dangerously near the 10 strontium unit level? Is it not surprising that the Agricultural Research Council's Report, a few weeks ago, showed that it depended not so much on the rate of deposit as on the total accumulation?

I think that the encouraging fact which emerged from the Report of the Agricultural Research Council was that the amount of strontium 90 in milk was becoming lower during the twelve months ended June last than in the previous twelve months. That is a trend which we all hope is continuing.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science what are his Departmental responsibilities for research into marine nuclear propulsion.

My noble Friend has responsibilities arising from the statutory power of the Atomic Energy Authority to undertake research into any matters connected with atomic energy, including marine nuclear propulsion.

Is the Minister aware that we are behind other countries in this field? Three years ago studies were initiated and five firms submitted tenders. Why is there this delay? Is it not because the Minister of Transport has failed to give a decision? If so, will the Parliamentary Secretary insist that his hon. Friend will jerk the Minister of Transport into some action? We are lagging behind the Soviet Union, Western Germany and the United States of America.

The Atomic Energy Authority, for whose programme alone, of course, my hon. Friend is responsible, is at the moment engaged on a programme of research and development studies of reactor types thought most likely to lead to competitive marine propulsion systems. Questions about a British nuclear-powered ship, as the hon. Member knows, should be addressed to the Minister of Transport.

asked the Parliamentary Secretary for Science if, in view of recent developments in Russia and the United States of America, he will re consider the possibility of instituting an independent British space programme.

Decisions on the nature and scale of our future space research effort must await the outcome of current discussions with other countries on the possible development of a satellite launcher based on Blue Streak

While we must obviously consider carefully whether we can afford expenditure of this kind, should we not also consider whether we can afford not to have a space programme and lose possible by-products of research on this subject?

We have, in fact, a space programme, a programme of scientific research experiments intended to complement the efforts of other countries in this field.

When are we likely to get a statement on the European agreement?

We are at present in discussion with the German and other Governments concerned.

asked the Minister of Works what steps he is proposing to take to maintain adequately the surviving stonework of Battle Abbey.

I am not responsible for maintaining Battle Abbey, which is privately owned. However, I am always willing to give advice to owners if they ask me to do so.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that Battle is a long way from the Dagenham constituency and that the hon. Member for Rye is quite capable of making any representations which are necessary?

My answer would have been exactly the same whichever hon. Member had asked the Question.

asked the Minister of Works if he will make a statement about the proposed statue of Earl Lloyd George.

Yes, Sir. On the recommendation of the Committee, of which my hon. Friend is Chairman, I am appointing Mr. Uli Nimptsch as the sculptor for the statue.

Circumstances have made it necessary for the Committee to meet many times in the last few years and I should like to thank them and my hon. Friend for the care and patience with which they have carried out their work.

I am sure that the Committee will be most grateful, as I am, to my right hon. Friend for that Answer. It was not an easy decision for there were several sculptors apparently of equal merit. The Committee was very sorry for the disappointment caused to those who were not selected.

asked the Minister of Works if he will give the figures of deer killed by motor vehicles in Richmond Park after dark and in daylight for the first four months after the speed limit was increased and the later opening during the winter months was introduced, and comparative figures for the same period for the three previous years.

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

asked the Minister of Works if he will give the figures of road accidents in Richmond Park for the first four months after the speed limit was increased to 30 miles-per-hour, with separate figures for injured and killed, and comparable figures for the three previous years.

I will, with permission, give the detailed figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT. In the four months after the speed limit was increased, there were only five accidents, of which three concerned bicycles only. Pedestrians were not involved in any of the accidents at all, and no one was killed.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many people living in Richmond are concerned about his intentions with regard to the Park? Will he give me an assurance that he has no intention, while he holds his present office, of widening the roads, installing traffic lights, installing "Keep Left" signs and other safety paraphernalia which we find on the public highway today?

Yes, I can give that assurance. Some feeling has been irresponsibly stirred up locally. It is based on false figures and imaginary prospects and, therefore, upon unwarranted anxieties.

Following are the detailed figures:

In the four months from the 4th August, 1960, when the speed limit was increased, the figures were:

• 5 accidents, 6 injured

In the comparable period of the three previous years they were:

1957	1 accident,	1 injured
1958	1 accident,	1 injured
1959	2 accidents,	3 injured

asked the Minister of Works how many letters or other communications he has received concerning the recently announced increases in expenditure on Royal palaces; and how many of the letters support, and how many condemn, such increases.

I have received two letters. One was critical of one item in the Estimates. The purport of the other was obscure.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that kind of Answer will not get him very far? Is he aware that I have sent him 112 letters, 103 of which support the view that I take and only nine support the proposal that he is making? Does he think that it is a civilised priority that £50,000 should be spent on 1A, Kensington Palace when hundreds of thousands of people are living in slum conditions?

Considering all that the hon. Member has been saying about this matter, I should not have thought that just over 100 letters meant very much one way or the other. Indeed, as he himself has said, some of those letters he sent me were critical of himself, such as that which began with the words:

"Better for you if you left the Queen alone."

Why did the Minister, in his original Answer, give inaccurate information? [Interruption.] Further, can he say why at this time £50,000 should be spent on one house when the Government are saying that they seek to provide National Assistance for people who need it most?

I am sorry, Mr. Speaker, but I do not know which Question we are on. I understood that we were on Question No. 39, which is about letters which I have received, or are we on the next Question? I could not hear above all the shouting.

The hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. W. Hamilton) was asking a further supplementary question to Question No. 39.

The answer to that part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question which I heard is that my original answer was not inaccurate.

But the right hon. Gentleman had 112 letters from me.

asked the Prime Minister what consultation with the Commonwealth Prime Ministers took place at the recent conference of Commonwealth Prime Ministers and during his recent visit to the West Indies on the control of immigration into the United Kingdom.

I would not wish, in general, to add to the agreed communiqués issued after meetings of Commonwealth Prime Ministers. But the Government of the West Indies were informed that the control of immigration would not be discussed at the last Conference.

As regards my talks in the West Indies, I would refer my hon. Friend to the Answers which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Louth (Mr. C. Osborne) and the hon. Member for Eton and Slough (Mr. Brockway) on 18th April.

Is it not clear that while the Government are dithering on this issue more and more people will want to come to this country before the vague threat of a ban on immigration is finally imposed? Ought not the Government to make a statement on their policy in the matter without delay?

No, Sir. I think that it would be a mistake to settle an issue of this kind without very grave consideration.

asked the Prime Minister whether he is in a position to make a statement on his visit to the United States of America.

I do not feel able to make any statement enlarging upon the joint communiqué issued by President Kennedy and myself after our meeting in the United States and what I said in the House on my return on 13th April.

I have answered a number of Questions arising out of points mentioned in the communiqué, but I do not think it would be proper to go beyond this.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there has been a curious dearth of information about his activities since his return and that this is not really up to his established reputation as a publicist? Can he tell us whether he is suffering from shock, or is merely tired?

Very poor.

It is in accordance with the rules of these meetings, of which a great number take place—and very sensible it is—that communiqués are issued and statements may be made relating to or explaining the communiqués, but not statements at large.

asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of his conversations with President Kennedy, he will undertake a new initiative to resolve the differences between the Free Trade Area and the Common Market.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will invite the Prime Ministers of the member countries of the European Economic Community to join him in examining the possibilities of British entry to the European Economic Community and of closer association between the members of the European Free Trade Area and of the European Economic Community.

asked the Prime Minister what steps he is taking, as a result of his talks with President Kennedy, to negotiate the entry of Britain into the Common Market.

I do not consider that this is a problem to be tackled by formal discussion at the level of Prime Ministers at this stage. We are actively engaged in seeking a solution of the differences between the European Free Trade Association and the European Economic Community.

I was encouraged by my exchange of views with President Kennedy and we certainly shall not slacken our efforts. The problems are not simple. We have to reconcile the interests of our own agricultural industry, our fellow members of the Commonwealth and our partners in the European Free Trade Association.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that his Boston speech was one of the most obscure speeches about integration by a Prime Minister since Mr. Ramsay Macdonald? Could he say precisely what he meant by "integration"?

I do not think I used that word.

Is it not clear that the danger to Britain grows daily by our not joining the Common Market? Is it not also clear that a great change of policy has taken place since the Prime Minister's conversations with President Kennedy? Would it not be a good opportunity, when France is in such great trouble as she is today, to make clear to her that we stand very firmly with her and that we seek to encourage her by making a gesture, by initiating talks, to show our interest in the Common Market?

I should not have thought that this was a very good moment to try to initiate very detailed negotiations.

We must not over-simplify the problem—I do not think that most people do—by talking of joining the Common Market like joining a club, paying the subscription, and that is all there is to it. It is a very difficult, complicated matter. We have very great interests to consider, in honour and duty—our obligations to the Commonwealth, which date from very long-standing arrangements, our obligations to our own agriculture, and, of course, our obligations to our partners in E.F.T.A. I have always felt that we should pursue, at least for the time being, the kind of informal discussions which are going on, because, as I have previously said in the House, I should be very unhappy if formal negotiations were started which led to no result. That would have a very bad effect in Europe as a whole.

Would not the Prime Minister agree that the first step before anyone joins a club is for the would-be member to make up his mind whether he wants to join the club or not? After that, he may be black-balled, or find the conditions unacceptable. That is the first step. Have the Government taken it? As the Prime Minister was saying in America that the split in Europe is extremely serious, does he not realise that the people primarily responsible for it are the British Government?

No, Sir. I think that we all recognise that derogations or special arrangements would have to be made if we are to keep our honour and obligations. The problem is: can they be reconciled with the institutions and the operation of the Common Market under the Rome Treaty? It is not an easy problem. I admit that it is of immense importance. I do not think that we ought to rush it. I do not think that we ought to ask the country to take a decision until the whole of the scheme, in the light of other movements which may be made to co-ordinate the efforts of the free world, can be considered as a whole.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that British industrialists in the last few years, in the face of all the difficulties to which he has referred, have not been standing still and have been meeting the situation by investing British funds in the Common Market countries, which is at least as good as exporting from this country to the Common Market countries?

I appreciate that there are advantages and dangers, but I think that this confirms how difficult the problem is. I have never disguised this. I think that it is one of the most difficult we have. I still feel that the approach that we are making is on the right lines. I might add, since it was mentioned in the communiqué, that I felt that with this advance with the new American Administration they would be prepared to accept what would be a greater degree of discrimination which would follow the merging of the Six and the Seven because of the general advantages in world stability. That is a big change, and it may help.

I recognise the complexities of this problem and the need to reconcile, as the Prime Minister has rightly said, the points of view of the Commonwealth, E.F.T.A., ourselves and the rest of Europe. Would the right hon. Gentleman say a little more about the procedure which he thinks should be followed in this matter? Is he contemplating that there should simply be a continuation of detailed technical negotiations on individual products, which do not appear to be getting very far, or does he contemplate some rather broader approach by which, for instance, we and our partners of E.F.T.A. might agree to accept the principles of the Rome Treaty while making it plain that we must negotiate particular issues, such as, in our case, free entry for Commonwealth products?

Yes, Sir; that is a possible approach. There are, of course, three obligations. There is the obligation to enter into a single agricultural system for Europe. That has not gone very far yet in the Rome Treaty. There are advantages in going in early and perhaps guiding in the way we would want. It is a great difficulty. There are also the Commonwealth obligation and the E.F.T.A. one. I do not want to say anything here which would injure what I hope we may be able to achieve.

Frankly, I have thought that there were two aspects to this—economic technical problems to which the right hon. Gentleman has referred, and something rather different, whether there is really the will to bring this about. I have felt that if there is, and if that could be arranged on the political basis, somehow or other we would find a way through the difficulties.

May I take it from that that the right hon. Gentleman contemplates direct negotiations with the French Government on this second question of the political implications and what he calls the will for us to join together?

No, Sir; not necessarily immediately, and certainly not at this moment. I think that it has to be cleared up at the top level whether there is a chance of making an arrangement on this kind of basis, and then we should proceed to what would be the very long and complicated negotiation on the details. I will not go further than that. I appreciate that there are different views, but I know that the House as a whole realises the importance to this country and the whole free world of the right approach to the matter in the right way and at the right time.

While it is clear that after these Washington discussions and before very long fundamental decisions will have to be taken, is the Prime Minister aware that many of us will welcome the statement that he has made that Her Majesty's Government intend to proceed with this matter with very great care, so that the right decision can be taken, and that we particularly welcome what he has said about the safeguarding of the three interests which he has mentioned? Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that it is the intention of the Government to proceed only in agreement with our partners in the Commonwealth and in E.F.T.A., and that in any final solution that may be reached the economic interests of those countries which, for one reason or another, cannot join the Common Market will be fully safeguarded?

Yes, Sir; all those considerations have to be borne in mind. Might I put it this way? I do not believe that all this could be brought about perhaps with a purpose which might lie even further beyond extending Europe to a still wider sphere without some losses and without somebody being hurt somewhere. Of course, nothing can ever be done without that happening. The question is: is the theme large enough and are the gains big enough for all the countries concerned to show that it is worth doing and that it ought to proceed? That is the kind of political decision that will ultimately have to be made by all the Governments concerned.