asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the policy of the Soviet Government as announced by the Soviet Ambassador on 17th March about the connection between an increase in British exports to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and purchases of Soviet oil, whether he will now reconsider Her Majesty's Government's political objection to allowing half the annual increase in this country's consumption of oil to be imported from the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, provided the oil is sold through a British distributing agency.

No, Sir.

Is not the hon. Gentleman aware that the Soviet Ambassador's statement made it clear that there would be a great deal more trade in the form of orders for capital goods coming from the Soviet Union if such an arrangement were entered into, and will he not dissipate the impression that the Government are neglecting the trading interests of this country under pressure from American cold war interests and the big oil companies?

I think it is well known that the United Kingdom's exports to the Soviet Union were only 1·1 per cent. of our total exports and that Soviet imports into the United Kingdom were only 1·9 per cent. of our total imports. The amount of trade that can be done between us depends very much, I agree, on the ability of the Soviet Union to earn sterling in our markets.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will approach the Minister responsible for external trade in the Canadian and Australian Governments with a view to allowing the duty free import of cast steel valves manufactured in this country, into their respective countries.

No, Sir.

Is the Minister of State aware that the duty-free import of steel valves into this country is causing great hardship to some engineering workers, and will he get in touch with his opposite numbers in the Canadian and Australian Governments and try to put a stop to this one-way preference system? Will the hon. Gentleman also urge the Prime Minister to call a Commonwealth Conference in order to revise the Ottawa Agreements?

I must tell the hon. Gentleman that we can trace no complaints from British firms concerning the level of the duties and we have no evidence that they are unreasonably high. We enjoy, in fact, a margin of preference of 12½ per cent. in Canada and 32½ per cent. in Australia. I am sure the hon. Gentleman would agree with me that it would be impracticable, and, indeed, undesirable, to attempt to arrange reciprocity of treatment item by item in our trade agreements with Commonwealth countries.

Will not the hon. Gentleman agree that he has received ample evidence from me?

I can only repeat that there have been no complaints from British firms concerning the level of these duties and that we have preferential treatment in both the Canadian and Australian markets.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will take steps to increase the duty payable on goods brought into the United Kingdom in ships registered in a country which practises flag discrimination against ships registered in the United Kingdom.

No, Sir; but the general question of retaliation against countries practising flag discrimination is kept under review by my right hon. Friends, the Minister of Transport and the President of the Board of Trade.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that flag discrimination is probably the biggest difficulty which British shipping has to face? If outright retaliation in kind is not the answer, does not he feel that something on these lines might help? If not, what do the Government propose?

I agree with the hon. Member in deprecating in the strongest possible terms the practice of flag discrimination. But if he has a particular question, I would ask him to address my right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport on this matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what has been the average annual value of exports from this country to the Republic of South Africa over the last five years.

£158 million.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that the loss of this trade, or any substantial part of it, would have serious repercussions on our balance of payments and the level of employment in this country?

Both of those propositions must be true.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many firms in development districts in the North-East have applied for inclusion in the trade lists of approved tenderers under the Government Contracts Preference Scheme since 3rd February, 1960; and how many have been approved for inclusion.

Each purchasing authority in a Government Department and a nationalised industry maintains its own series of trades lists of approved tenderers, which include both firms in development districts and firms outside. Under the Government Contracts Preference Scheme these authorities, when awarding contracts by open competitive tender, are normally prepared to give preference to firms in development districts, provided that price, specification, delivery, etc., are equal. I cannot say how many firms in each of these separate lists may be situated in development districts in the North-East.

Why cannot the hon. Gentleman say this? The list of firms is published in the Board of Trade Journal. Does not he agree that, if the existence of the list were made more widely known to firms in development districts, more of them might wish to apply for inclusion?

I think that the hon. Gentleman has the point wrong about the Board of Trade Journal. We do not maintain at the Board of Trade a list of tenderers approved under the Government Contracts Scheme. Lists are maintained by purchasing authorities, of which there are over sixty, and they classify their lists according to the type of purchase required. For instance, in the War Office alone there are 1,500 such lists.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) what steps he proposes to take to encourage new industries into the West Riding of Yorkshire;

My right hon. Friend does not consider that any special steps are necessary in the West Riding of Yorkshire, to dissuade industry from leaving or to encourage new industries into the area.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that his predecessor made a promise concerning industry in the West Riding and that it is only right that the Board of Trade should honour it? Is he further aware that where industries, particularly mines, are becoming exhausted, something should be done to bring new industries to the area instead of taking panic measures? Due consideration should be given to old, traditional industries that are dying out in the West Riding.

As the House knows, in scheduling places as development districts we are required by the Act to take into consideration high and persistent unemployment. I am glad to tell the House that in the West Riding in the first three months of this year the wholly unemployed figure has been only 2 per cent. of the total registered working population, and therefore it is only right, in fairness to areas that have serious problems, that we should not consider scheduling it as a development district.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there are pockets of unemployment as high as 10 per cent. inside the West Riding? Does not he agree that it is wrong to take the figures for a very large area?

The hon. Gentleman asked me a question about the West Riding as a whole. He cannot, therefore, complain if I answer with figures covering the West Riding as a whole.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Monopolies Commission has completed its investigation of sales agreements between oil companies and garages and petrol dealers; and whether he will request the Commission to inquire into the exclusive sales agreement for lubricating oils which the Regent Oil Company has recently circulated to garages selling Regent petrol, before it issues its report.

No, Sir. As regards the second part of the Question, one of the things which the Commission is explicitly required to investigate and report on is the type of agreement to which the hon. Member refers.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that the long delay in this inquiry reveals the fact that the Government made a grave mistake when they emasculated the Monopolies Commission six years ago against our advice and protest? Would not he also agree that it is altogether wrong for the Caltex Company to make a new and more stringent agreement with garage proprietors while this inquiry is going on? Is he aware that the other oil companies have played the game and have given what help they could to the Monopolies Commission? Does not he realise that if the other oil companies now alter their agreements this inquiry will never be completed?

I would not agree with the first part of that supplementary question. As the hon. Gentleman knows, once an inquiry is set up, the Commission acts independently of the Board of Trade and takes what time it thinks necessary. Nor can I agree with the second part of the supplementary question, in which the hon. Gentleman said that the Commission had been emasculated. This type of agreement is within the Commission's terms of reference, and this shows how wise the Government were when they drew up those terms.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what credit facilities he has made available in order to assist a consortium of British firms to obtain the contract for building and equipping an alloy steel plant at Durgapur.

As the consortium is aware, the usual facilities are available from E.C.G.D. The Indian Government can, of course, if they wish, ask for a special development loan for this project.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that this is not exactly a case where normal credit facilities would apply or are being asked for, but a special case where special help is needed to main- tain British trade with India? Is it not a fact that the tender from the British consortium is either at just about or is below the level of the Japanese tender, but that the Japanese are offering far better credit facilities? Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that this is a case where, in order to maintain British trade with India, we should reconsider how much we are to invest for that purpose and for the maintenance of employment here?

The hon. Gentleman has raised very large questions in that supplementary question. Agreements for British loans to India to a value of £98·5 million for the third five-year plan have already been signed. We have had no request from the Indian Government for such an additional loan. If such a request were received it would be considered alongside India's many other requirements for the financing of imports.

Has not the British consortium itself asked the British Government for help to measure the assistance being offered by the Japanese firm. What reply has he given?

The point is that this is an Indian Government venture. We have had no request for a loan for this purpose from them. There is obviously a limit to the amount of trade we can buy with this form of aid. We have had no request from the Indians for this. We should not resent the fact that India, for necessary financial purposes, does seek aid from other sources as well as from us.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the progress he has made in setting up the Consumer Council, and give the names of those members so far appointed.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now announce the members he has appointed to the Consumer Council; and when the Council will have its first meeting.

I would refer the hon. Members to the Answer which I gave to the hon. Member for East Ham, South (Mr. Oram) on 9th April. The date of the Council's first meeting will be for the Chairman to decide in consultation with the other members.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Consumer Association has condemned the inadequacy of the Govment's proposals as a possible set-back to the consumer movement? Is it not clear that, in watering down the original proposals, the Government have shown that they do not take either consumer information or consumer protection seriously? Will not he ask his right hon. Friend to scrap the present proposals and set up a Department of Government and a Consumer Council with real teeth so that we can adequately protect consumer interests?

The hon. Gentleman is way off the ball. He is expressing opinion, not fact. There is no chance that what is proposed will water down the proposals of the Molony Committee as to the type of consumer organisation. The Molony Committee did not recommend a special Department of State to deal with consumer interests.

The Committee recommended that there should be a more adequate Consumer Council with full-time representation, and the Government have now abandoned that idea. Is not this a departure from Molony and the original proposals?

The Molony Committee did not recommend that members of the Council should be full-time.

Does my hon. Friend realise that a number of consumers are only too delighted that this should not be in the hands of Government Departments but dealt with by an independent committee? Is he further aware that many of us on these benches wish Baroness Elliot and her Committee every success in keeping it out of Government control?

I am sure that there is a great deal of wisdom in what my hon. Friend says.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give the number of bankruptcies and of companies which underwent compulsory liquidation, respectively, in 1962.

There were 4,145 bankruptcies and 718 compulsory liquidations.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that those are the highest figures since the war? Is this an example of Tory freedom? Does he not think that there is some case for an investigation to see whether any pattern of instability could be identified which could be remedied or modified by Government or other action?

If the hon. Member were to examine the annual report of bankruptcies, he would see a breakdown by classes of business. There have been substantial increases in bankruptcies in many classes of businesses, but I think that he will find it difficult to draw conclusions from those variations. Of course, it might be said that under the present Government conditions are more competitive.

asked the President of of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the high rate of unemployment in Thorne; and on how many occasions during the past three months he has drawn industrialists' attention to Thorne and its advantages as an industrial site.

My right hon. Friend is aware that unemployment in Thorne remains high. No firms new to Thorne have had their attention drawn to the area in the past three months; but an I.D.C. for an extension has been issued during this period to a firm which has settled there within the last few years.

Is not the Parliamentary Secretary prepared to do more than that? Is he not aware that when the national unemployment figure stood at about 3 per cent., it was more than 10 per cent. in Thorne and that at that time he was advising the unemployed of Thorne to seek work in Doncaster, 10 miles away? Is he not aware that since that time Ford's works in Doncaster has given notice that it is to close down? Will he do something really active in Thorne to provide work for the people there who are anxious to contribute to Productivity Year?

I agree that in considering Thorne's problem one must look very closely at the future for Doncaster, but the hon. Member will know that there are a number of uncertainties in Doncaster which are by no means resolved. When the picture is a little clearer, we will have this very much in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the road, rail and water transport facilities of Goole, which, together with its high unemployment, make it a desirable town for new industries; and whether he will now schedule it for development.

Under the Local Employment Act, the criterion to which my right hon. Friend must have regard in listing localities as development districts is that of high and persistent unemployment. He does not consider that there is any likelihood of this in Goole, and cannot therefore add it to the list of development districts.

Is not the Parliamentary Secretary aware that in Goole there are several hundred people who have to travel many miles every day to seek work elsewhere—to Scunthorpe, Leeds, Bradford, Hull and other places? Is he not aware that if he does not take some strong action to provide some alternative employment in Goole, the town is foredoomed to failure in the future? Is it not time that the whole of the West Riding, and particularly its industrial portions, came under a special review by the Board of Trade?

I would not agree. As hon. Members know, we keep the list of development districts under almost constant review and hope that we are able to adjust the scheduling of districts to take care of trends. At the moment, on current form, we should not be justified in making Goole a development district.

Why does the hon. Gentleman insist on sending industry out of the West Riding and into other parts of the United Kingdom?

The hon. Member is asking a very specious supplementary question. He knows perfectly well that under the Local Employment Act firms which want to develop in any part of the country have to get industrial development certificates and we have to try to see that where a firm can appropriately go to a development district it does so. The hon. Member knows that as well as I do.

On a point of order. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the subject on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the amount of National Research Development Corporation expenditure written off in each of the past three years because of the cancellation of unsuccessful development projects.

My right hon. Friend is informed by the Corporation that the approximate amounts written off were: £141,000 in 1962; £189,000 in 1961; and £21,000 in 1960.

Has the Parliamentary Secretary seen the criticisms of the present financial arrangements contained in the Corporation's last Annual Report? In view of the Corporation's very fine record and the fact that it has demonstrated that it has by no means any tendency to squander money, is it not time that the financial arrangements were changed so that it did not have to carry forward balances year after year without any opportunity of writing them off?

I think that the hon. Member knows that so far the Corporation has not recovered enough profit from successful ventures to cover both capital and interest charges, as well as the costs of unsuccessful projects. However, it is important that its financial arrangements should be sufficiently flexible to support projects whose immediate commercial benefit is at least doubtful.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that one of the main objects of the National Research Development Corporation is that it should undertake work likely to be very long-term in showing any profitable return? As this inevitably means that some of the risks are bound to be rather heavy, does he think that the figures which he has announced this afternoon are in any way unexpected?

I would agree with a great deal of what my hon. Friend has said. I see that there are many Questions today about the National Research Development Corporation. I very much hope that we might have an opportunity some time to have a proper debate on this subject.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the work of the N.R.D.C. is sufficiently known among smaller specialising firms? Is he aware that at least one of his colleagues takes the view that small firms are not appropriate bodies to receive the Bulletin, for instance? As there is much propaganda about private firms originating developments which were in fact originated by the N.R.D.C., will he see that its work is made more widely known?

The hon. Member will know that the Corporation is independent in its day-to-day management. It makes very serious efforts to try to get across to industries, of all sizes and all over the country, how it can help and what its function is. If the hon. Member would let me have details of firms which he thinks would benefit from contact with the N.R.D.C., I would be glad to assist him.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what opportunity is afforded to the National Research Development Corporation to augment its income by entering into trading transactions based on the commercial exploitation of selected projects which have been successfully developed under its sponsorship.

Section 1 (4) of the Development of Inventions Act, 1948, requires the Corporation to entrust the exploitation of its inventions to the industry concerned unless the Corporation considers there are special circumstances which otherwise require. Subject to this condition, the Corporation can and does enter into trading activities.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this is a very severe restriction upon the Corporation's trading activities? Would it not be better if the Corporation were given power to exploit its own developments rather more freely in order to be able to build up reserves and to spend more on new developments and to stand its losses much better than it can now?

The hon. Member will be aware that it is in the nature of the Corporation's activities that many of the things it finances are unlikely to be very profitable. Many of them are financed at a loss. However, it needs only one or two successful ventures and the Corporation's finances will be completely altered. If the hon. Member would like to write about any particular instance he has in mind, I should be very happy to discuss it with him.

If the hon. Gentleman reads the Corporation's Annual Report, he will find complaints about all these things. After 16 years, is it not time that we once again examined the Corporation's powers, functions and financial structure?

The hon. Member's interpretation of the Report is rather different from mine. I should be happy to discuss with him any particular instance which he has in mind, but I do not think that we get anywhere discussing these things in generalities.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the average annual cost to the National Research Development Corporation of assessing the potentiality of the inventions submitted to it each year.

My right hon. Friend is informed by the National Research Development Corporation that about a thousand inventions are assessed every year, mainly by the permanent scientific and technical staff who are also concerned with development and exploitation. Their salaries were £172,580 in the year 1961–62.

Will not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that this sum seems abysmally small in view of the size of the job which the Corporation does? May we have an assurance that its work is not being restricted by lack of cash? What is the likely contribution from industry and how does the hon. Gentleman propose that the Corporation should be able to recoup the money it has spent?

If the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question on the specific point in the second part of the supplementary question, I will be happy to answer him. He will appreciate that we do not accept direct responsibility for the Corporation's day-to-day management and that I have to get technical replies from the Corporation and cannot give them off the cuff.

Can the hon. Gentleman assure us that lack of finance does not prevent the Corporation from doing the job it is given?

To make a very broad generalisation, which is borne out by fact, the frustration—if one likes—of the full development of the Corporation's potentialities has not been due to lack of finance but because there has not been quite as many good ideas as one might have hoped.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proportion of National Research Development Corporation expenditure on the hovercraft, electronic computer, and dracone projects is being spent in Scotland.

The National Research Development Corporation is responsible for managing its own affairs, including the placing of contracts. My right hon. Friend understands, however, that the answer is four.

Four what? Did I understand the hon. Gentleman to say four, meaning 4 per cent.?

No, four projects.

The Question asked what proportion of this specified type of work was being done in Scotland.

I apologise to the House. I read the wrong Answer.

It seems strange, and I am sure that my hon. Friends will agree with me, that we cannot be given the proportion. We are not asking how much money is being provided, but what proportion is being spent in Scotland.

As the hon. Gentleman knows, where Corporations like this work with industry, figures must not be given which would indicate how much an individual firm is getting, and in this case even a percentage would indicate too much about individual firms.

What possible commercial reason can there be why the general proportion going to Scotland should not be given without providing specific details?

This is a specific Question on hovercraft, electronic computers, and dracone projects, and the right hon. Gentleman knows that some of the firms involved have activities in Scotland and in England and it would be very difficult to break down the figures.

Is the hon. Gentleman saying that he cannot answer the Question because it is impossible, as he calls it, to break down the figures, or is he saying that there is some commercial reason against it?

In fact, it is both.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many of the thirty-five development projects being given financial and other assistance by the National Research Development Corporation at the end of the 1961–62 financial year were being developed in Scotland.

The National Research Development Corporation is responsible for managing its own affairs, including the placing of contracts. My right hon. Friend understands, however, that the answer is four.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the figure of four is very low, and in my opinion is too little? It does not indicate whether it is a major or a minor development, and one assumes that a figure of four is a minor development. To retain technical personnel in Scotland, will the hon. Gentleman use his good offices to try to bring more of these development projects to Scotland?

One would be delighted to do that, but I think the hon. Gentleman recognises that there have to be the projects coming from Scotland to be worthy of the Corporation's support. It works both ways.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many of the twenty-three potential development projects under consideration by the National Research Development Corporation at the end of their 1961–62 financial year have now been commissioned; and what proportion of these has been placed with enterprises in Scotland.

The National Research Development Corporation is responsible for managing its own affairs, including the placing of contracts. My right hon. Friend is informed, however, that none of the projects referred to has yet been commissioned.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that reply is disappointing and that if such a rate of progress continues it bodes ill indeed for Scotland?

The hon. Gentleman may be interested to know that one of the twenty-three projects was proposed by a firm in Scotland.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how far the development of the hovercraft has progressed; and what prospects there are of commercial orders being placed for each type.

My right hon. Friend is informed by the National Research Development Corporation that four licensed constructors have built experimental prototypes which have been successfully demonstrated. Each of these firms is energetically seeking orders.

Can the Minister give us any indication When it will be commercially saleable? Can he further say how much public money has so far been advanced towards this worth-while project?

With regard to the second part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question, if he likes to put down a specific Question on that point, or to write to me, I shall try to provide the information, but as I explained earlier we do not accept day-to-day Depart- mental responsibility for the internal running of the Corporation. As to when hovercraft are likely to be a commercial success, I think that the firms concerned would very much like to know the answer to that themselves. In fact, one cannot say. It is in the nature of such a development that one cannot say with certainty, but one is hopeful that orders will be coming soon.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he proposes to take to accelerate the work of the Monopolies Commission.

The review of policy on monopolies and restrictive practices, which the right hon. Gentleman knows about, is concerned with all aspects of monopolies and restrictive practices legislation, including the working of the Monopolies Commission.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that as a result of the emasculation of the Commission by the Government no major report has been made for a year past, and that there are several industries before the Commission which have been under consideration for two or three years? Are the Government really satisfied with this rate of progress?

The right hon. Gentleman would not expect me to agree with the first part of his supplementary question. With regard to the second part of it, I said in reply to an earlier supplementary question that once an industry has been referred to the Monopolies Commission it is up to the Commission to decide how soon it completes its report and when it will report.

Is it not a fact that the Commission can operate only with the staff that it is allowed to have by the Government and that the Government have some responsibility for seeing that this machine works? Is the Board of Trade really satisfied with a situation in which we have had no reports for 12 to 15 months?

As my original reply suggested, these are matters which will be considered in the review which my right hon. Friend has instigated.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the closing down in the near future of the Imperial Chemical Industries' Westfalite factory in the Dearne Valley area, and the Ford Motor Company assembly plant in Doncaster, he will now schedule as a development district under the 1960 Local Employment Act the whole of south Yorkshire.

As my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour said on 1st April, the Ford Motor Company has not yet reached a decision on the future of its plant. My right hon. Friend does not consider that the level of unemployment in this area, in comparison with other parts of the country, would justify listing it as a development district; but there is a need for more projects employing, women in the area, and he is prepared to approve suitable projects which cannot go to a development district.

Is the Minister aware that there is a strong suspicion in Yorkshire that the Government, by financial inducements, are encouraging businesses to move from Yorkshire to other parts of the country? Does not the Minister realise that new businesses and new jobs are required in this country instead of the transfer of work from one area to another, and that we hope he will do something to help Yorkshire instead of giving us mere promises?

I am not aware that there has been any transfer of work on a major scale from the West Riding of Yorkshire to development districts. With regard to new industries going to development districts, that is implicit in the very concept of a development district.

Does not the transfer of the two plants mentioned in the Question mean that business will leave Yorkshire for some other part of the country? Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that the I.C.I. Westfalite plant has already bean transferred to Scotland, and that it is more than likely that the Ford Motor Company will transfer its Doncaster plant elsewhere? That is taking work out of Yorkshire, and as far as we are concerned we are not going to have it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the adverse balance of trade with Venezuela for 1958 to 1962.

This information is available from Account IV of the appropriate issues of the Trade and Navigation Accounts which is a document returned to the Order of this House.

Is the Minister aware that from those Accounts it appears that we have been running a large adverse balance with Venezuela for quite a number of years and that last year it amounted to £57 million? Does he believe that this helps exports? Can he say why he finds it so easy to provide sterling for Venezuela and yet so difficult to provide sterling for State-trading countries which would help our exports?

Perhaps I might put it this way: one should not look at these figures in too crude terms. Nearly nine-tenths of our imports from Venezuela consist of oil owned by international companies in which there is a substantial British participation. That is point number one. Secondly, we do not aim to balance our trade with individual countries on a bilateral basis. We seek to achieve a satisfactory position in our overall trade.

Is it not crude petrol that the Minister is getting from Venezuela, and why does he draw the line there?

I was not aware that I was drawing the line particularly with Venezuela.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he had with American Ministers during his recent visit to the United States on the matter of strategic exports to State-trading countries.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given on Tuesday, 9th April to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Swingler).

Does the Minister realise that we have had a number of replies to this Question—some of them to myself? Does he further realise that none of those replies has been satisfactory? Can he tell us what is happening about this suggested business of the steel pipes, and trade with Russia? Is it the case that the South Durham company concerned in the matter has now been told to ease up on the whole business? Can the Minister say which of the authorities now running British foreign trade has instructed the company in respect of this matter? Is it the British Government, the United States Government, or some other authority?

Perhaps it would be safer for me to answer the question in the terms in which it was originally put. The list of embargoed goods is reviewed at approximately twelve-monthly intervals, as the hon. Member knows. The list was much reduced in 1958. Since then there has been only one list, which applies to exports to all Sino-Soviet bloc countries. There is no special list for China. The hon. Member can well understand the position that arises in the case of the steel pipes to Russia. So far as I know, at this moment there is no specific order in front of any company.

Since the suggestion has been made, can the hon. Gentleman deny that any obstacle is being placed by the Government in the way of the South Durham company exporting steel pipes from this country?

No specific obstacle has been placed in the path of the South Durham company's bidding for this order.

asked the President of the Board of Trade bow many inquiries he has received from industrialists with the object of siting new industries in the urban districts of Stanley and Consett in the County of Durham since they were listed as development districts; and what were the results.

Three local firms have applied for financial assistance under the Local Employment Act. There have been a number of inquiries from firms outside these districts, but no firm projects have been secured yet. My right hon. Friend will continue to recommend Consett and Stanley to industrialists inquiring about possible locations.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that his answer seems to indicate a complete failure of the Local Employment Act to direct new industries to my constituency? Is he further aware that despite the great fall in the unemployment figures in my constituency, the latest available figures show that the rate of unemployment is 4·6 per cent, in the Stanley exchange area and 3·1 per cent. in the Consett exchange area? Is there nothing that he can do, in co-operation with his noble Friend the Minister for Science, to induce industrialists to come into the area? Should not there be a more rigorous control of this type of industry?

The hon. Member will be interested to know that within recent months the Board of Trade has recommended Consett and Stanley to seventeen different industrialists with different projects. Regrettably, so far a firm project has not been realised.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will impose quantitative control on imports of paper of the kinds manufactured in areas of high unemployment.

No, Sir.

I thank my hon. Friend for that courtesy. Does he recollect that the Minister of Labour, a fortnight ago, said that 1,700 people normally employed in the paper-making industry were registered as unemployed? As every 30 tons of paper imported means one British workman out of work for a whole year, what steps is my hon. Friend taking to remedy this serious situation?

I am aware of the anxiety felt by all paper makers, regardless of whether or not they are situated in development districts. The difficulty, in reply to my hon. Friend's original question, is to ensure that if we protect a certain type of paper it will not also be made in an area that is not a development district. He will appreciate the versatility of paper-making machines and paper-making people.

Does the hon. Member realise that the paper-making industry in the north of Scotland, and especially in Aberdeen, is being prejudiced, now that there is unemployment in the industry? Will he take steps to see that justice is done to that industry?

I am interested in the affairs of this industry, and I can assure the hon. and learned Member that Aberdeen has not been particularly prejudiced in this matter. I can also assure him that I am in close personal touch with the paper-making industry and with its present problems.