asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will designate the burghs of Ayr and Prestwick as a development district.

No, Sir.

In view of that somewhat unsatisfactory reply by my hon. Friend, could he say exactly what degree of need or unemployment in an area must justify its being declared a development district?

As my hon. Friend knows, as a result of correspondence which we have had, there is no fixed statistical level of unemployment which qualifies an area for inclusion in the list of development districts. We have to look at both the current level of unemployment and its likely persistency, and we also have to take into account the general incidence of unemployment over the country as a whole.

Has the Minister no sympathy whatever with his hon. Friend the Member for Ayr (Sir T. Moore)? Is he aware that at the last election his hon. Friend prophesied full- time employment under a Conservative Government and that this is the worst forecast that has ever appeared in Old Moore's Almanack?

If the Minister is not prepared to consider these two worthy burghs in isolation, will he not give part of Scotland at least the benefit of new thinking in relation to a wider area and consider scheduling the whole of Ayrshire, which would not only meet the needs of the two burghs concerned, but would meet the demands of the Scottish Council that we should think also in terms of growth points?

I cannot give an undertaking to schedule the whole of Ayrshire, but I certainly undertake to my hon. Friend and to the hon. Member that we will keep these matters under very close review.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has for bringing new industries to Wigan.

My right hon. Friend is prepared to give sympathetic consideration to proposals for local expansions in Wigan or new projects which could not reasonably be expected to move to one of the development districts listed under the Local Employment Act.

Can the Parliamentary Secretary be more specific? What he has said is very nice, but it does not mean very much. Can he give more details? What has he in mind for Wigan?

I regret that I cannot be more specific. The hon. Member knows the general position that we are not prepared to designate Wigan as a development district. We are prepared to do what we can to assist local expansion—the hon. Member and I know of one or two cases which it is not appropriate to discuss in public—and secondly, there are firms who cannot go to development districts but whom we are anxious should go to places like Wigan.

asked the President of the Board of Trade the estimated total cost of new machinery in respect of the cotton re-equipment schemes, and the cost and grant, separately, of machinery installed at the latest available date; and if he will estimate the extent of new machinery, to be installed before the time limit expires.

Up to 1st May, 1963, a total of £5 million was paid as re-equipment grant, being 25 per cent. of total eligible expenditure by the industry of £20 million. This included expenditure on the installation of new machinery and the modernisation of existing machinery. I regret that it is not possible to make the other estimates requested by the hon. Member.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that those figures fall substantially below the expectations of the Government when the scheme was started? Is it not true that the figures indicate conclusively the complete lack of confidence in Lancashire arising from the Government's policy of allowing an overflow of imports? Is it not about time that the Government looked again at the situation and at least arrested some of the haemorrhage and the damage which is being done to the industry?

I do not think the hon. Gentleman is entitled to draw the conclusions that he has done from these figures. Grants under the Act are not eligible for payment until a firm has completed its work, paid its bills and has satisfied the Cotton Board that the necessary conditions have been complied with. To say that the £5 million is a long way behind the forecast does not give a fair picture. The original total estimate given was £30 million, including the closure element. Scrapping took £11£8 million of that, and it remains to be seen whether the final figure comes up to the original estimate. Imports are another matter. If the hon. Gentleman would like to put down a question, I am sure that my hon. Friend the Minister of State will try to answer it.

Is not the hon. Gentleman misleading the House? Is it not the case that in July last it was anticipated that over £100 million of orders would be firmly placed but that in the ten months that have elapsed only about £30 million has been invested? So is he not being too optimistic in his expectancy for the next two months? Does not this situation prove lack of confidence in Government policy?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the total amount of Government grant at the latest available date for installed new textile machinery under the re-equipment scheme and which is now out of use due to the firms closing down.

Precise details are not available. The best estimate which the Cotton Board can make from the information they have is that the figure is about £10,000.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the President of the Spinners' and Doublers' Association has referred to a number of mills which have had equipment grants but have now gone out of business due to lack of orders? Is he further aware that under the scrapping scheme adventurers came back into the industry with public money? The second phase of this scheme shows the lack of confidence in the industry. Will the hon. Gentleman do something constructive about it?

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, arising out of the recommendation of the Molony Committee on Consumer Protection that, pending the establishment of a grading system for carpets, all carpets should be labelled stating the weave, fibre content, &c., he will indicate what action it is proposed should be taken.

My right hon. Friend is still considering this recommendation in the light of comments which he has received from interested bodies.

Is my hon. Friend aware that he has been considering this too long and that it is time something was done? There is a great deal of consumer discontent on this matter. Is he aware that carpets are still being sold under the old utility label of Grade A, which is quite meaningless today? There are grades above that, but people think they are buying a genuinely Grade A carpet, although they are buying something which is probably nearer to Grade B or Grade C? This is quite disgraceful, and it should be looked at from the point of view of consumer protection.

That is exactly the angle from which it is being looked at. When one considers imposing additional legal obligations, these things cannot be done very quickly. It is necessary to study them carefully. A draft British Standard dealing with the labelling of carpets of all types is in the final stages of preparation and covers most of the elements—except that of construction—recommended by the Molony Committee. This goes a long way towards meeting the Molony Committee's recommendations.

asked the President of the Board or Trade, in addition to the list of goods subject to embargo for the state trading countries which is placed before Parliament from time to time, what recommendations or guidance he receives concerning British exports to these destinations of items not covered by the Export of Goods (Control) Order and the Strategic Goods (Control) Order.

My right hon. Friend receives advice about exports to the state trading countries from many quarters. The only goods subject to export control are those listed in the Export of Goods (Control) Order and in the Strategic Goods (Control) Order.

Is the list placed before Parliament definitive and complete? As steel pipes are not on the list, is the hon. Gentleman fully supporting the South Durham Steel Company in its efforts to acquire an important order?

I gave a reply on 28th March on the export of steel pipes. The position has not altered. I have already said that goods subject to export control are listed in the Export of Goods (Control) Order and the Strategic Goods (Control) Order. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would care to look them up.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that small British firms are at a disadvantage with their foreign competitors in the export market arising from a lack of credit facilities; if he will examine this matter; and if he will make a statement.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he has taken or intends to take to ensure that credit facilities are made available to small firms to enable them to tender for large export orders.

My right hon. Friend is satisfied that the credit facilities available to small British firms compare well with foreign facilities, and can enable credit-worthy firms to undertake any export orders within their capacity.

Will the hon. Gentleman look at the case, details of which have been sent to his Department, in which a British firm with capital assets of £10,000 earned a £250,000 export order but could not get the banks to give credit or the Export Credits Guarantee Department to underwrite it and, therefore, lost the order to West Germany. All the continental countries are able to give, and do give, these credit facilities. Will he look into this matter again? The papers are in his Department. Neither his Department nor the Treasury were able to do anything to help this firm.

I am aware of the case. The hon. Member must draw a distinction between the ability of a company to trade within its own resources or to use the normal banking facilities to increase capital assets with which to do more trade than it is already doing and the actual extension of State credit facilities. There is no evidence in my possession which suggests that State facilities in foreign countries, as opposed to banking facilities, are better than or even as good as the State facilities provided here.

When considering this Question, will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the increase in postal charges on parcels is discouraging certain small firms from continuing with exports and that it is just possible that a review of or assistance with credit facilities may tip the scales in favour of their continuing to export?

Questions about postal charges should be addressed to my right hon. Friend the Postmaster-General, but I am sure my noble Friend would agree that we should not subsidise such things.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment or try to get into the debate next week.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will state, in respect of the North-East for the year ended 31st March, 1963, the number of industrial development certificates issued, the area covered by them, and the estimated additional employment resulting from them.

Eighty-five industrial development certificates were issued, with a total area of 2·5 million square feet, and an estimated employment of 6,300.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that reply is totally unsatisfactory. How does this compare with the rest of the country in terms of these services? Is he aware that there is still 5·1 per cent. unemployment in the North-East region? The figure he has quoted is totally inadequate.

I recognise that the figures of unemployment in the North-East are high. However, over the year in question, the total working population of the North-East represented one-twentieth of the working population of the country as a whole and the new jobs arising from the issue of industrial development certificates in the North-East represented one-tenth of the new jobs created through these certificates in the country as a whole. If the hon. Gentleman follows that up with arithmetic, he will see that the North-East got twice as many jobs proportionately as did the remainder of the country.

I beg to give notice that shall raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what has been the number of requests received for development grants since Seaton Delaval and Blyth were scheduled as development districts; how many have been granted; and what are the sums involved.

Five firm applications have been received for financial assist- ance for projects in Seaton Delaval and Blyth, but only one of these has included a request for a grant: this case is at present under consideration.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this news is rather disturbing? The efforts of his Department were recently described as having got off to a good start, but will he appreciate that a good start after twelve years of Conservative rule in Britain is not good enough and that we want more than a good start? Will he let us have something tangible in the very near future?

Leaving out the political overtones of that supplementary question, I think that we are off to a very good start. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Board of Trade is building one advance factory in Seaton Delaval and other in Blyth. That seems to be substantial evidence that we mean what we say.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the functions of the newly-appointed Consumer Council will extend to dealing with travel agents.

The Committee on Consumer Protection recommended that the Consumer Council should confine itself to those services which are linked with the supply or treatment of goods. The Council's terms of reference require them to have regard to the views expressed by the Committee. My right hon. Friend would not, therefore, expect the Council to consider the activities of travel agents.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this leaves rather a wide gap in consumer protection? In view of the liquidations and take-overs which have taken place in this trade over the last twelve months, will ILT, ask the President of the Board of Trade to look very closely at this matter with a view to extending the activities of the Consumer Council?

My right hon. Friend has an open mind on this issue, but he feels that the Consumer Council has a lot of things to deal with in relation to goods. However, if the Council represents to him that it wishes to look into the matter which the hon. Member has raised, he will certainly consider widening the terms of reference.

Is not this an industry in which there has been a bit of trouble with people going out on holiday and finding the facilities they contracted for were not there? Is not the number of travel agents increasing almost as rapidly as the number of betting shops? Would not the hon. Gentleman consider looking at this matter on his own, getting his Department to look at it, to see whether anything can be done to protect tourists before the Summer comes on?

The hon. and learned Gentleman will not be surprised to know that I have looked at this. I can tell the House that the Association of British Travel Agents, to which the majority and certainly the more reputable travel agents belong, is very conscious of these matters and has a pretty strict code of standards, probably stricter than Parliament would ever enforce by Statute. It follows from that that if people want to be secure when doing business with a travel agent they know that members of the Association are strictly policed. Equally, there are travel agents not in the Association who are highly reputable and who honour their contracts.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that this question of bad services to the public is just as important as that of the public being swindled by bad goods being provided? Will he keep his mind open and try to say something about it in the debate on Monday?

I have an open mind, but it is very much harder to get precise information on matters like these than when one is dealing with goods, which can be much more precisely defined. The Molony Committee had a good deal to say about this matter, and I commend its Report to my hon. Friend. I have an open mind, as my right hon. Friend has, to all suggestions about how services could be better covered.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what con- sideration has been given to, and consultation with other Commonwealth countries initiated on, the proposals sent him by the honourable Member for Chigwell for amendments to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade designed to free and foster trade within the Commonwealth and to reduce tariffs within this and other groups of nations; and whether he will make a statement.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the communiqué which was issued after the meeting of the Commonwealth Trade Ministers on 14th May.

Is my hon. Friend aware that that communiqué and conference disappointed many of us very much? Is not some modification of the "no new preference" provisions of the G.A.T.T. as suggested, for example, in these proposals prepared by the Commonwealth Industries Association, necessary if Commonwealth preferences, now in danger of being further squeezed by the Kennedy Round, are to be brought into line with the requirements of the modem Commonwealth—or have the Government decided to do away with it altogether?

We conferred with our Commonwealth friends about methods of improving their relative position within expanding world trade. The expansion of world trade is surely as much in the interests of the Commonwealth countries as it is in ours or those of any other country.

Will my hon. Friend tell me why we have committed ourselves in advance of the discussion to a slavish support for the Americans' view of what they want on the Kennedy Round of negotiations?

My hon. Friend has used rather imaginative terms in describing Her Majesty's Government's attitude towards the Kennedy Round. The Kennedy Round is part of a discussion within G.A.T.T., and the American representatives come to that round armed with more powers for reductions of their own tariffs than had previously been the case. We have welcomed this. We are not slavishly committed to any particular thing within G.A.T.T.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what information he has been given by the National Coal Board regarding forthcoming closures of coal mines in the Blaydon area.

The National Coal Board has informed my right hon. Friend that the High Marley Hill, Stanley Burn and Stargate collieries in the Blaydon area are scheduled for closure during 1963.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that these forthcoming closures will make a total of twelve coal mines, two large coking plants and other industrial establishments to be closed in the area? Is he further aware that the mobility of labour is becoming much more difficult because mechanisation is leading to cuts in manpower? Would he not agree to the need for immediate measures to offset these serious dislocations? Can he say what long-term plans there are for industrial development in so far as it affects unemployment in the area?

We understand from the National Coal Board that about 395 men are likely to be involved in the three closures which I have mentioned. The Coal Board has said that it is not yet possible to say precisely how many of these can be redeployed to replace natural wastage in neighbouring pits, but that it is unlikely that more than about half the men involved in the closures at Stanley Burn and Stargate can be placed locally. As the hon. Gentleman knows, the Coal Board tries to redeploy men in other parts of the Durham coalfield. We naturally realise that this makes the need to get more industry into the Blaydon area greater, and the hon. Member knows that we are doing the best we can. He may like to know that Blaydon was made a development district in July, 1962, and that since then more than £500,000 has been offered in assistance to firms to go there.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many representatives of firms likely to expand he has met in the course of the last month; and how many firms have com- mined themselves to expand in development districts as a result of these discussions.

As a result of my right hon. Friend's invitations to the chairmen of companies with growth prospects, twelve meetings have been held since the end of April, and others have been arranged over the next few months. It is too early to expect these discussions to have led to firm decisions to undertake projects in the development districts.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the President of the Board of Trade left the impression in his Budget speech that he personally would be meeting the representatives of these firms? Is it the case that officials of his Department are meeting them, not the right hon. Gentleman? Can the hon. Gentleman impress on the right hon. Gentleman the need for urgency in this matter, for young people are getting out of the development districts as quickly as they can because of the apparent lack of progress?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that, in the last three weeks particularly, my right hon. Friend has been away on very important commercial conferences. It has not been unreasonable, therefore, that his junior Ministers and senior officials should have seen some of these chairmen, for the very reason which the hon. Member mentioned—that we want to get a move on.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the big concessions announced in the Budget are not as generally well known as he might think, particularly by some of the smaller firms? Will he take all possible steps to advertise these concessions?

Yes, Sir.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many new jobs have been created in the development districts in Fife as a direct result of the operation of the Local Employment Act; and to what extent the creation of these new jobs has been offset by the loss of existing job opportunities.

Of the 2,000 jobs estimated to arise from projects in Fife for which assistance has been offered under the Act about 450 have already arisen. I cannot say how many existing jobs have been lost, but I understand that about 2,000 redundancies have been notified to the Ministry of Labour since April, 1960.

Does not the hon. Gentleman recognise that what is happening in Fife is happening in other parts of Scotland, and, indeed, in other parts of the United Kingdom, where people are dependent on declining basic industries? Is he aware that the measures which the Government introduced in 1960 were blatantly inadequate? Can he give us any hope, even with the newly announced incentives, that the number of new jobs provided will be greater than the increasing number of redundancies which are occurring?

I would not be rash enough to try to forecast precisely how this would work out in any development district, but we very much hope that the results of the improved benefits will be as the hon. Gentleman wants.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the total value of bagpipes imported into the United Kingdom in the last three years: and what were the countries of origin.

Imports of bagpipes are not separately distinguished in the trade statistics.

Is the Minister aware that one would expect more wind in his reply that that? Would not it be fair, with an instrument of this nature, to make a separate record to indicate the way in which foreign competition is affecting industries in Scotland which manufacture bagpipes? In view of the state of the Scottish economy, should not the Board of Trade do everything in its power to encourage the production and manufacture of these instruments in Scotland?

I would be the last person to decry the importance of the manufacture of these musical instruments to Scotland. If a request were made by the industry for a separate heading, this would be considered, but it is very unlikely that the scope of the trade would be sufficient to warrant this. Perhaps the hon. Gentleman would care to bear in mind that musical instruments are one of the very few categories of goods which are dutiable when imported from the Preference Area, so in fact these instruments have some form of tariff protection if imported from the Commonwealth.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will establish an industrial estate adjacent to the Carlisle Road, Airdrie, in view of the consistently high unemployment rate in the area and the suitability of the site.

I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member of 10th May.

Is the Minister aware that quite recently it was reported that 9·2 per cent. of the insurable population were unemployed in this large locality? Does the Minister realise that it is difficult to induce private enterprise to build factories, and that one of the ways of achieving our objective would be to lay out an estate and provide factories at reasonable rent which could give the area an opportunity of breaking the back of the consistently high level of unemployment there?

The hon. Gentleman knows from my reply on 10th May that we are to build a new industrial estate in North Lanarkshire, and we shall announce as soon as possible precisely where that estate is to be located.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the value of exports of newspapers and periodicals to Canada in the most recent year for which figures are available.

In 1962 exports of newspapers and periodicals to Canada as recorded in the Trade and Navigation accounts were valued at £40,830. This figure does not include the exports by post for which details are not available.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that this valuable source of foreign exchange is likely to be completely dried up by the imposition by the Postmaster-General of a 1,200 per cent. increase in postal charges? Can the Minister say whether any representations have been received on this subject, and, if so, what reply has been made to them?

The whole matter has been carefully considered, but the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that the Canadian Magazine Post, which was unchanged since 1907, allowed for specially low rates applicable only to Canada for articles of this kind. This is now going to be changed, and the postal rates applicable to Canada will be the same as those applicable to other overseas countries, and so it will not be absolutely unfair in our exchange with Canada. In addition, I am sure the hon. Gentleman appreciates that the special rates were costing £280,000 a year of public money, and I do not suppose that he really approves of that.

Have not the agents who import these newspapers and periodicals consented to pay the full cost, and is it not greatly less than the ls.0½d per lb. which the Postmaster-General is proposing to charge?

If I have notice of tint detail I shall look into it and let the hon. Gentleman know, but I cannot give the answer out of my head.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will add the Brandon and Byshottles Urban District Council to the list of development areas, in view of the continued contraction of the mining industry.

My right hon. Friend would not be justified in adding the Durham Employment Exchange Area (of which Brandon and Byshottles form part) to the list of development districts, since the rate of unemployment there is well below that prevailing in development districts. But he is aware of the importance of coal mining in these places and will continue to watch the position.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware of visiting the neighbouring urban district on the occasion of the inauguration of an advance factory there. This urban district is contiguous, almost identical in size and population and is dependent on what were mining industries. Its only sin is that it does not come into the same employment exchange area. If it is unrealistic to deal only with parts of the Tyneside area, can the Parliamentary Secretary tell me why it is realistic to deal differently with two urban districts which are affected by the same problems? One has been scheduled as a development district since the Local Employment Act came into force, but the other has not been so dealt with.

As regards the hon. Gentleman's point about the employment exchange area, over the last year the unemployment figure has been very much lower there than in any of the surrounding development districts. There are at present more jobs in prospect in Durham Employment Exchange area than the total number registered as unemployed. I would be very happy to let the hon. Gentleman have the figures.

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

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the value of computers imported into the United Kingdom in each of the last five years.

Imports of computers are not separately distinguished in the trade statistics.

Why not?

They are a relatively new item. We are considering whether they should be included in the 1964 circulation list.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a statement on the official visit to South Yorkshire of the Minister of State.

Yes, Sir. My two-day visit to South Yorkshire this week was one of a number of export promotion visits which I am making to manufacturing centres throughout the country. These visits are a continuation of those made by my predecessor early last year and provide opportunities to meet, in their own offices and workshops or at informal gatherings, as many as possible of those who are already engaged in exports in order to discuss with them their successes, ideas, problems or difficulties.

While thanking the Minister for that comprehensive reply, may I ask whether it is his intention to go to the Port of Goole, which is the only port in the West Riding of Yorkshire and is a natural outlet for exports from Yorkshire to the Continent of Europe? Will he consult the authorities in Goole with a view to increasing exports through the port?

I know the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that one cannot be everywhere at the same time, but the means of moving goods from factories, whether in Yorkshire or in any other part of the country, through the most convenient ports are amongst the matters discussed with industrialists, and therefore the needs and problems of Goole are in fact discussed even though I have not been there.

Is the Minister aware that the public of Yorkshire view this visit with apprehension? Is he further aware that they look on this visit not as a means of increasing exports but as a means of poaching industry out of the county?

I assure the hon. Gentleman that those suspicions are wholly unfounded. My sole purpose in making the visit is to help to promote exports, and the location of industry or the moving of industry out of Yorkshire has played absolutely no part, and would play no part, in any of my discussions with the constituents of the two hon. Gentlemen who have raised this matter.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the value, respectively, of armaments and of other exports supplied in each of the past five years to the Republic of South Africa; and what is the expected value of similar exports during the coming year.

The annual values of our total exports to the Republic of South Africa are obtainable from Account IV of the appropriate December issues of the Trade and Navigation Accounts. It is not our policy to disclose the total value of armaments exported to other countries. As far as total exports to South Africa are concerned, they have been rising in recent months, and we expect them to reach a higher level this year than in recent past years.

Is my hon. Friend aware that any cancellations of orders for supersonic naval strike aircraft, which incidentally are wholly unsuitable in terms of security duties, could cause unemployment in east Yorkshire? Would not my hon. Friend agree that the cancellation of orders for political pm-poses is bound to have repercussions on our export trade?

In general, I agree with my hon. Friend's comment on that, but he will appreciate that if he has a specific question on that point it is a matter for the Foreign Office and not for me.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many advance factories are in process of building in the County of Durham; how many will be completed in 1963; how many are in contemplation; and what estimate he can give of the number of workpeople who are likely to be employed.

Ten advance factories are being provided in the County of Durham under the present programme. Three of these are already under construction. My right hon. Friend expects that seven will be completed this year and the other three soon afterwards. The 10 factories should provide more than 1,000 jobs.

When does the hon. Member expect production to begin?

When the factories are completed and we have tenants for them.

Is not this all pie in the sky? Is nothing definitely arranged? Is it not a fact that at the end of the day very few men will be absorbed into employment? Is not that the position? Is this the best that the Government can do? In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that shocking reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter on the Adjournment.

I do not think that the irregularity of the notice can be successfully concealed in a supplementary question

asked the President of the Board of Trade what industries he is seeking for the Wingate area in County Durham where coal-mining has ceased and is unlikely to be resumed; and what are the prospects of new industries for Peterlee.

Any company is welcome which will provide stable employment for men in the Wingate area. In the last few weeks three companies have decided to establish new projects in Peterlee. These are estimated to provide nearly 200 new jobs.

Is the hon. Member aware that as a result of the closure of the pit in the Wingate area 600 men have lost their jobs? Does he really believe that the employment of 200 men—when they are actually employed—will make very much difference to that situation?

I think that it will. It all helps. Furthermore, I know that in recent weeks a number of other companies have been visiting the Peterlee area, and we hope that some, at least, will establish projects there.

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

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that Kingshill No. 2 Colliery is likely to close, that in the same area 14 collieries and mines and a foundry employing 600 men have been closed since 1948, and that there is already heavy unemployment in the Cleland, Newmains, Forth, Carluke and Wishaw area; and what proposals he has for providing work for the unemployed and those who will become unemployed in this district.

Projects already secured for North Lanarkshire and Shotts are estimated to provide nearly 6,500 new jobs, and my right hon. Friend will continue to encourage new industry in this area. But he cannot undertake to provide employment specifically to replace jobs lost as a result of a particular closure in a particular place. Travel-to-work is a recognised feature of life today.

Is the Minister aware that this question does not deal with a particular closure of a particular pit? Is he aware that this area has been the worst-hit area in the whole of Britain from the point of view of loss of jobs owing to declining industries? Is he further aware that this is an area where, according to the county plan, in the next few years there will be a great increase in population? Does he realise that none of the 6,000 jobs about which he talks is situated in this area, and that for many people none of these jobs will be in what could be called a travel-to-work area?

I do not entirely agree with the hon. Lady in the second part of her supplementary question. I agree with her about the need to bring many more jobs to this area.

Is the hon. Member aware that in considering this part of the County of Lanarkshire it is absurd to talk in terms of travelling to North Lanarkshire for jobs? Is he aware that there has been great neglect of the needs of this part of the county for new jobs, and will he take that fact into account in his considerations?

I am aware of the problems of people travelling from Forth to Carluke and beyond.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the same valuer was responsible for revaluation for rates in the rural district of Wimborne and Cranborne, the adjoining county borough of Bournemouth and the rural district of Beaminster; and what directions as to the basis of revaluation were given to the valuer or valuers concerned.

No, Sir. A different valuation officer was concerned for each area. The basis for the new rating assessments is prescribed by law. No special directions were given to the valuation officers concerned.

Is my hon. Friend aware that as a result of the activities of these different valuers the rate burden in the rural district of Wimborne and Cranborne has increased by almost double the increase in the adjoining county borough of Bournemouth, which has many more amenities, whereas in the rural district of Beaminster, which has similar amenities to Wimborne and Cranborne, the rate burden has actually gone down? Is not this a very striking discrepancy? Will not my right hon. Friend ask the Inland Revenue to look into the matter again?

As my hon. Friend the Financial Secretary to the Treasury told my hon. Friend when he brought a deputation to see him and my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government, this question is being looked into. The deputation was quite recent. It submitted a mass of material, and our investigations are not yet completed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will alter the regulations concerning Premium Bonds so that they can be held by a trustee.

No, Sir.

Is not my hon. Friend aware that a number of people hold Premium Bonds in a trustee capacity, and that should these trustees—or sham trustees—die, the Premium Bonds are aggregated to those trustees' estates, to the great inconvenience of the charitable or other bodies for whom they have been acting? Will he look into the matter again?

I should point out that the Premium Bonds scheme was introduced with the intention of attracting a new class of small savers. In this it has been extremely successful. The expense of the scheme is justified only on that ground, and it is certainly not designed to appeal to trustees.