asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what criteria he adopted in appointing the members of the Economic Planning Council for the North-West.

rose—

Hear, hear.

I am glad to see right hon. and hon. Gentlemen in their places.

Is it a fact that all the members of the Council who are also elected members of local authorities are supporters of the Labour Party? If so, does the right hon. Gentleman think that this is giving fair representation to all the interests of the region, which is what he undertook to do?

Offhand I cannot say; I do not know. As a matter of fact, the members of local authorities are chosen by me from a list nominated by associations of local authorities.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will ask the Price Review Body to examine the proposed increase in the price of the 3d. inland letter post.

No, Sir. As we explained in the debate on postal services on 30th March, we have conducted an exhaustive examination of Post Office finances. I should be delighted if all private industry could stand up as well to a similar scrutiny.

We recognise the right hon. Gentleman's desire to promote a better atmosphere between Government arid industry, but does he realise that this would be greatly helped if he gave an assurance that either this or some other price increase in the public sector could be put before this body for close and detailed scrutiny?

I have given my reasons for not sending this one, and I still think that they are good and sound reasons; but I have always made absolutely clear that I do not rule out sending a case in the public sector, and, if circumstances at any stage seem to warrant it, I shall do so.

Will the right hon. Gentleman look at the matter again? Is he aware that the public are not getting value for money in the service at the moment and that, in spite of the raising of the letter postage rate by the Postmaster-General over three weeks ago, there are still areas in the country where there is a grave shortage of postage stamps? Will he ask his right hon. Friend to look into it?

I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will find ways and means of putting that to my right hon. Friend. I am bound to record that, in my view, the public get very good service from the Post Office.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many industrialists are currently serving on central and regional planning bodies established by his Department, or otherwise assisting his Department in a part-time or unpaid advisory capacity; and what is the total number of man-hours which they may expect to devote to this work during the course of a full year.

Two hundred and seventy-eight. I am happy to say that they are willingly giving all the time the national interest requires.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for answering the Question, which I put down two months ago and which he chose not to answer on that occasion, but will he agree that all these people might well be better employed getting on with their jobs and producing more goods for export instead of being engaged in flatulent discussions with the right hon. Gentleman?

I leave the hon. Gentleman to work out his own views about the flatulence of industrialists between himself and them.

Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly answer the question, which I put to him for the second time?

Mr. Bruce-Gardyne—Question No. 5.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I have put this question twice to the right hon. Gentleman, and on each occasion he has chosen to evade an answer.

I do not understand what the hon. Gentleman is doing. It does not raise any point of order.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he intends to refer wage awards resulting from arbitration procedures and independent committees of inquiry to the National Board for Prices and Incomes in any cases where such awards are regarded by the Government as potentially inflationary.

The Government will refer any questions relating to prices, wages and other money incomes which they consider it desirable to have investigated in the national interest.

Does this mean that the Government are prepared to refer decisions of arbitration tribunals and other bodies of this kind to the National Board for Prices and Incomes and, if so, will the right hon. Gentleman agree that his Answer, in conjunction with the comments of the printers' union about the activities of the Government over their wage claim, would suggest that it is time that he and his right hon. Friends apologised to my right hon. Friends for their strictures on their attempts when in Government to intervene in wage bargaining?

Does the First Secretary realise that he faces a very complicated problem here? Is it his intention to refer pay claims to the Board before they go to these arbitral or other agreed procedures, during the procedures or after award, or is it his intention that this wide range of industrial claims should be excluded from his incomes policy?

I am much obliged to the hon. Gentleman for the way in which he puts his question. It is a very complicated matter. If one rules out moving in any particular area, one only limits the possibility of helping. I would not normally think it a good thing to intervene at any stage while the normal procedures are proceeding; but, of course, there may be an occasion when, at some stage, it would be wiser to do it then than to wait until later. Therefore, with the agreement of both management and unions, the series of White Papers was written in such a form as to leave a fairly wide discretion to the Minister as to when, how and if he should move.

Could the doctors' proposals come within the terms of such reference?

They certainly could. Whether they will is another matter.

Has the right hon. Gentleman consulted the Minister of Labour on this particular application?

All members of this Government consult each other almost all the time.

The First Secretary said that he would not normally think it desirable to intervene, as I understand it, while a claim was being considered. There remains the further point raised by my hon. Friend as to whether hewould refer a case which had already been to arbitration or to some other form of committee of inquiry which had given its view but which the Government considered had resulted in an inflationary increase which was unjustifiable. Has he given throught to whether he would be prepared to refer that to the Board?

It might not only be because we thought it inflationary, but there might be other reasons in the public interest why one would like it to be looked at, and one has the power to do so in any circumstances when one thinks it right.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many small farmers are aggrieved because of recent increases in their rents, and will he consider submitting cases of landlords' incomes to the Board?

It sounds a very interesting proposal. I should like to hear rather more of it.

In view of the totally unsatisfactory nature of the replies to both my Questions, I beg to give notice that I shall seek leave to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest opportunity.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many cases of price and wage increases, respectively, have now been referred to the Price Review Board.

Four, Sir. All, of course, involve all considerations affecting price increases.

Will the Frst Secretary refer the recent large increase made by the London Electricity Board to the National Board for Prices and Incomes? Why is he being so complacent, particularly as price rises in the last six months have been the equivalent of nearly 8 per cent. annually, or £1 a week for the average family?

There is a danger of overlapping another Question about electricity prices. There is a later Question, No. 24, about that.

I have already referred to the question of referring the prices of nationalised undertakings, and there will be other Questions on that. I shall consider the particular point which the hon. Gentleman raises.

The First Secretary gave the figure as four. My hon. Friend's Question asked for the cases of price and wage increases respectively. Has the right hon. Gentleman separate figures for those? Does he recognise the danger that his incomes policy, because of the difficulty of referring wage increases—I raised this point in a supplementary question to Question No. 5—may come to rely increasingly on control of prices?

I have always made quite clear that my view—I think that it is the view of most other people who have seriously considered it—is that if one can get price stability one has the only climate in which one can hope to have an incomes policy. Therefore, in what is inevitably something of a "chicken and egg" operation, if one has to decide on somewhere to start, prices are the right place. But I have not referred only prices, as the hon. Gentleman knows. I shall consider them all. In any case, it is a slightly non-meaningful distinction because, even in dealing with prices, the question of costs must be taken into account, and costs by definition must include wages and other considerations of that kind. So in no case could one really say that this is dealing only with prices and that is dealing only with incomes. That is why I answered as I did and said that all considerations apply equally in a sense to all cases.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will refer to the Prices and Incomes Board the cost of rail and bus fares, coal and coke, electricity, inland postage and house mortgages.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he is aware of increases in freight charges on British Railways; and if he will refer these to the National Board for Incomes and Prices.

No, Sir. I made it clear in the debate on 11th May that we would not hesitate to refer a nationalised industry case to the National Board for Prices and Incomes if the circumstances made this desirable. But I do not think that it would be helpful to refer the cases mentioned by the hon. Members.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that fares and the cost of fuel and mortgage interest rates are much more significant items in most people's personal budgets than the soap, flour and detergent which he has selected for examination?

It is a matter of opinion. On the question of mortgage rates, the hon. Gentleman will know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government explained the work that we are doing to get a national housing plan which would deal with them. Right hon. and hon. Members may have noticed an announcement today which is not without some significance in this respect. I notice that when Bank Rate comes down, we do not hear very much about it from right hon. and hon. Members opposite. I took the cases which the hon. Gentleman mentioned into account but for a variety of reasons I came to the conclusion that they were not the best ones to start with.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in certain parts of Scotland there is no alternative to consigning fish other than by British Railways? Increases in consignment rates for fish could raise the price of fish and bear badly on the consumer.

Without accepting necessarily that all that is accurate, I shall be glad to look at the matter if the hon. Gentleman will write to me.

In view of the announcement today of the reduction in Bank Rate, will my right hon. Friend refer the question of mortgages to the Prices and Incomes Board? When Bank Rate was increased, it was argued that this was the reason for the increase in mortgage rates. Should not there now be a reduction?

I should think that this afternoon would be a bit early, but I will keep it in mind.

On a point of order. The right hon. Gentleman said that he would listen to my point if I wrote to him. I wrote to him over a week ago.

In that case, I must be listening.

The right hon. Gentleman will be able to listen in a correspondential sense.

The right hon. Gentleman says that this is a matter of opinion. As he is using the input-output analysis mentioned in Question No. 23, would not he agree that this is not a matter of opinion? My hon. Friend is right and he is wrong.

The one thing that the use of input-output analysis will not do for us is enable us to make a judgment on the decision. I have made one judgment, the hon. Gentleman has made another. It is a matter of opinion as to who is right.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what is the total floor area of the offices to be occupied by the regional economic planning boards; and what is the total number of staff it is intended to employ.

Sixteen thousand, two hundred and eighteen sq. ft. and 77, respectively.

Is not this a rather large floor area? What steps does the right hon. Gentleman take to try to keep these areas and numbers within bounds?

A great number of steps; and, in fact, much of this represents the bringing together of civil servants who are now scattered over a large number of offices. This will, therefore, make for much greater efficiency.

Will my right hon. Friend take it that the people of Wales—I am sure that this applies to other regions which need development—will welcome the setting up of planning machinery and that we shall happily accept the need for further offices and further staff if it means that we shall no longer have to put up with the haphazard development we had under the previous Government?

I am very grateful to my hon. Friend.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what progress has been made in the diversification of Short Brothers and Harland's operations; what are the names of the consultants whom he has appointed to advise him; and when he will be in a position to act on their advice.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he has yet received the consultants' report on the future of Short Brothers and Harland, Belfast; and when he will make an announcement.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will give the details of the background and experience of the firm of Messrs. Arthur D. Little, consultants, which led him to appoint them to review the affairs of Short Brothers and Harland.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he expects to receive the consultants' report on Short Brothers and Harland, Belfast.

May I, with your permission, Mr. Speaker, preface this Answer by thanking the hon. and learned Member for Antrim, South (Sir Knox Cunningham) for protecting me from his hon. Friends last week.

Will the right hon. Gentleman be making the report public, and, since the review will not affect the position which is being considered by the Plowden Committee, will he state whether he has any further orders for aircraft for Shorts in the offing?

On the latter point, the hon. and learned Gentleman will know that I made a fairly full statement at Shorts last week, which received widespread publicity, and I do not think I need add to that or go beyond it. On his first point, I think that, before actually committing myself to publication of the full report—after all, the consultants were brought in with the agreement of the company—we had better await the nature of the report and decide then whether it is the right sort of thing to publish or not.

But without waiting for the consultants' report, will the right hon. Gentleman, for the benefit of American competitors and others, reiterate the pledge he gave about Shorts, that the company would remain in the aircraft industry and will thus be fully able to meet its present and future commitments'?

Certainly. The Minister of Aviation has said this. I said it in Northern Ireland. I repeat it here now. I think that it would be very good for Shorts, and for Northern Ireland, if there were diversification of its interests and if it were not linked to this one form of enterprise; but, having said that, we have both of us made clear—using exactly the same words—that Shorts is in the aircraft industry, it will remain part of the aircraft industry, and anyone who has bought or is thinking of buying any of its excellent products can be quite sure that the company will be able to fulfil all its after-sales service and so on.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take into account that a firm like Shorts cannot diversify for several years and the company will go through a very difficult period in the intervening time? Does he still hold the view that the Shorts plant is suitable for diversification for machine tools? No one else does.

Shall we wait and see what the consultants say?

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he has decided the boundaries of the Economic Planning Region for East Anglia; and if he will make a statement.

I am still considering the form of planning machinery best suited to the needs of the area covered by the previous Government's South East Study. I shall announce my conclusions as soon as I possibly can.

I am aware of my right hon. Friend's problem in dealing with the very wide area covered by the South East Study, but will he accept that there is tremendous concern in Norfolk and East Anglia in general about the boundaries of the region? May I suggest that he considers a region which would cover the portion of East Anglia as it is generally understood by the people living there?

I am well aware of the views of people in East Anglia as I am well aware of my hon. Friend's views. Without going beyond the Answer I have given, my hon. Friend can take it that that is very much one of the questions I am now considering.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take plenty of time before he sets out his ideas on the future planning of East Anglia and have regard to the subtle inter-relations of agriculture, the countryside, industry and the rest, because, with respect, most people in East Anglia have no confidence in his ability to plan for East Anglia or anywhere else?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for the pleasantry. We shall take as much time as making a sensible decision requires, but I am sure I can promise him that we shall have it done before we go to the country in 1969.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what are his current plans for the further economic regeneration of the North-East Region.

The Economic Planning Council has already started work with a view to preparing a comprehensive development plan for the Northern Region.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that in spite of the excellent progress in recent months there are still certain underlying weaknesses in the economy of the North-East, and, in view of that fact will he, as the responsible Minister, give every encouragement to those motor car manufacturers who have made inquiries in this area, to encourage them to establish plant which is so badly needed?

As my hon. Friend knows, I was up there very recently myself, and I had a good look at what was going on. I think we have to be very careful not to sound too gloomy about the North-East region—

Hear, hear.

for although there are many problems still to be settled, nevertheless it is an encouraging and thriving place. Of course there is a lot more to be done and we shall certainly bear in mind all the very real points my hon. Friend has made.

Would the right hon. Gentleman, in his efforts to help the North-East Coast—I am glad he enjoyed his visit there—advise the Chancellor of the Exchequer to abandon Corporation Tax and will he also advise him to accept our Amendments to the Finance Bill about shipping interests?

A good deal of that supplementary question hardly seems to arise out of this Question, but I am glad to say how much the hon. Lady's attendance at the cocktail party added to my enjoyment of my visit.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give up the ridiculous pretence that for the first time he is bringing into action a planning group for the North-East? That group was brought into action two years ago by my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for St. Marylebone (Mr. Hogg); a White Paper was published and received the approval of this House. The whole process was implemented then, and the prosperity of the North-East at the moment owes an enormous amount to it. It would be a help if he were to give a clearer picture of the situation and if he took more responsibility for the work he is trying to do himself.

I am much obliged to the right hon. Gentleman. As a matter of faot, I have always been willing to pay tribute to such work as was done before we came in and on which we were able to build. I wish I could say as much of the attitude of the right hon. Gentleman to the work we have been doing since.

What has the right hon. Gentleman done?

rose—

Much as I should like to call other hon. Members on the Question, we are making such slow progress with Questions that I think we had better get on.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what effect he estimates that the increased use by nationalised industries of coal rather than oil will have on the stability of prices.

None, Sir.

If that is so, which is a very surprising answer, is it not true that, if the Minister of Power had not made his statement giving preference to coal, the nationalised industries might have reduced their prices? Is this not in direct conflict with the right hon. Gentleman's policy for prices and incomes?

That is a different question from the one put down. We have gone into this very carefully and the answer is the one I gave the hon. Gentleman: none.

When considering the effect of this decision on the stability of prices, will my hon. Friend also consider what the impact on the balance of payments will be of using domestic fuel instead of imported fuel?

There are, of course, a great many factors to be taken into account here. We could not do without a coal industry altogether. If we eat too much into it the cost of what remains will be very high indeed. There are many factors to be balanced and we have tried to balance them. In doing that we took the decision we recently made.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what action he will take to encourage the co-operation of industry in fulfilling the Government's long-term development plan.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how soon he expects to achieve his policy of ending restrictive practices, demarcation disputes, using more labour than is necessary, the under-use of machinery, and the refusal to use modern techniques; if he will set out in detail the steps he has taken already to achieve those conditions; and if he will make a statement.

I intend to continue and enlarge the process of consultation with both sides of industry through the medium of the National Economic Development Council and the little Neddies. It would not be sensible however to put a timetable on the complex task confronting us, which will require determined effort by the Government and by both sides of industry at all levels. I am today publishing in the OFFICIAL REPORT and placing in the Library copies of a note which will, I hope, give hon. Members a clear picture of the interrelationship between the Government's industrial policies and the development plan.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask him if he is aware of the gross misrepresentation of Governmental economic policy in the past few weeks, obviously politically inspired? Is he further aware that this misrepresentation is bound to recur to an even greater degree on publication of this plan, so will he take steps to combat this?

I tried to reply very quickly to the last manifestation, but one of the things which always occurs to me is this; every time I go into the country I find a great difference between the attitude of industrialists and businessmen out there and that of those who in here pretend to represent them.

As one who has always supported the right hon. Gentleman's policy and hoped he would succeed for the nation's sake, may I ask him this? What hope has he really got of his policy being accepted at the shop floor level, and what steps can he take to stop the foolish unofficial strikes we have seen very recently from holding up production?

We suffer from more than one foolish move in industry and on more than one side. I have every hope that the policy will succeed, and it is the more likely to the more it is recognised that it is not my policy or the Government's policy but the policy which management and the unions and the Government have accepted.

With reference to the right hon. Gentleman's supplementary answer to his hon. Friend the Member for Ashton-under-Lyne (Mr. Sheldon), is he aware that the remarks which he made in reply to the Institute of Directors provokes the question, "Who feeds whom?"

To answer that very interesting question would keep me going on for a very long time.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that there is a growing anxiety because of the fact that the Government's fiscal and legislative policy appears to be designed primarily to placate the trade unions in the hope that they will respond by a diminution of militancy in pay claims and by the abandonment of restrictive practices, and that no perceptible response in either of those two spheres has yet manifested itself? Will he address himself to this basic defect in his incomes policy?

That description of the Government's fiscal and other policies I would not accept, and the hon. Gentleman's last comment is inaccurate and will also be unhelpful. It is no use telling people who are trying to do their best in difficult circumstances that we do not believe they are doing their best. It would be better to give them a bit of encouragement, I would have thought.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what progress he has made with his review of the South East Study; and if he will now make a statement.

Good progress is being made but I cannot yet give a date when the review will be completed.

Is my right hon. Friend in a position to give some indication when the review is likely to be completed? Would he also bear in mind the suggestion of giving sympathetic consideration to the representations made by Kent County Council and other local authorities in Kent, especially in view of the fact that they were thoroughly dissatisfied with the previous Government's South East Study and are, therefore, very glad that this new opportunity is being taken of having a new look at the policy?

Certainly this is one of the questions which is very much in mind. It would, I think, unduly tie my hands to try to give a date now.

Will the right hon. Gentleman realise that much expansion and, indeed, considerable housing development in this area is being delayed till he makes a statement? Could he not give a pledge to the local authorities in this area that they can have something from his Department before the Summer Recess?

The hon. Gentleman must have missed the fact that on 3rd February my right hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Local Government announced some interim proposals to deal with the problem he has in mind.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs in view of the large wage increases granted since his policy of income and price restraint was announced, and as printers are demanding another 7 per cent. to 13 per cent. increase, miners 12 per cent., railwaymen 61 per cent., train crews 18 per cent., teachers 35 per cent. to 42 per cent., and London busmen 9 per cent., if he will now abandon his policy of a 31½ per cent. annual increase; and if he will make a statement.

This is not, as I pointed out in my Supplementary reply on a previous Question, my policy alone. It is that of management, of unions, and of Government. We must all fight to make it effective.

If these increased figures of salaries and wages are to continue to be granted without any further productivity, will not the right hon. Gentleman try to make the whole nation—every section of it—realise that the Continental type of inflation will be inevitable, which would make War Loan and National Savings Certificates as valueless as the old German pre-war bonds? Would he not try to impress this upon the whole nation?

I am impressing it on the whole nation, and I think the hon. Member is doing his best. I suggest he has a word with his own Front Bench.

Is not my right hon. Friend aware by now that hon. and right hon. Members on the other side of the House are obsessed with talking about wage increases but not with increases in directors' remuneration and that it is precisely this attitude which inflames and antagonises the men on the workshop floor? I speak with first-hand experience, unlike hon. and right hon. Members opposite.

Yes, I am well aware and recognise that there is a serious problem here, as does everybody who is seriously looking at it. One of the weaknesses is that people are in the habit of looking at a problem from their point of view, and not from the other chap's point of view, of what he should do about it. We should adopt a new attitude.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the whole tone of his answers has changed considerably even in the last month? Until then he was boasting about his policy. Now that it is proving to be ineffective he is trying to spread the blame to other people, even to the Opposition Front Bench, though that policy has been openly rejected by his own trade union. In the general interest will he not take the responsibility upon himself?

When the trade union of which I am proud to be a member took the decision to disagree with me publicly I stood up to them, and I recommend the same attitude to the right hon. Gentleman.

I beg to give notice that I should like to raise the matter on the Adjournment, with your permission, Mr. Speaker.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many manual and salaried workers are at present covered by outstanding pay and hours claims; and what proportion he proposes to refer to the National Board for Prices and Incomes.

At the end of last week claims for pay increases or hours reductions, or both, were known to be outstanding for about 2,160,000 manual workers, and about 1,340,000 salaried workers. I am currently considering what further cases of prices as well as incomes, should be referred to the Board.

Will the right hon. Gentleman agree that these recent increases in wages are far greater than any possible, conceivable increase in prices? Would it not be much wiser to tackle this question of wages instead of merely tackling the question of prices?

I feel the hon. Gentleman could not have heard or taken in the Answer I gave just now. Precisely so long as we all go on attacking the other side and not taking a balanced view so long shall we have difficulty in applying the policy to prices. I heard an hon. Member opposite say "Scrap the Board". That is the view of hon. Members opposite, but not, of course, the view of industry itself, not management nor unions. Prices have risen as well as incomes, and incomes of all kinds as well as wages—fees of all kinds as well as wages. We have got to get them looked at and that is what we are trying to do.

Are not a great many of the wage claims being submitted in fact being based upon increased productivity?

There clearly are cases in which that is so. Let us remember that the purpose of the policy, unlike some of those previously, is not to enforce restraint. The purpose of this policy is to achieve expansion and more productivity under which we can enjoy real higher incomes.

No one doubts the difficulty, but the question I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman is this. Does he himself detect any lessening of militancy in the presentation of claims—that is the crux of the matter—and if not, what is he going to do about it?

There have been recent examples where quite clearly the trade unions have been showing a great deal of restraint, and the hon. Member must be aware of them. I do not want to mention any names individually, for that would be invidious, but there have been outstanding examples which ought to be applauded.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what general principles he follows in deciding whether to refer a wage or salary agreement which exceeds the 3½ per cent. norm to the Incomes and Prices Commission.

I consider whether an investigation on a particular case would be in the national interest because of its importance for the economy: or for the parties concerned: or because it raises issues which are of general interest.

Will the right hon. Gentleman, because of the importance of these references, not consider being tougher here and let it be known that, irrespective of what has gone on before, what will happen in future is that any increases over 3½ per cent. will automatically be referred to the Board?

That would be the wrong way to go about it. The 3½ per cent. is an overall figure applying to personal incomes of all kinds. The overall rise in gross domestic production does not mean one cannot have much higher wages for special cases for the reasons set out in the Declaration of Intent. As for my being tough, from some of the things I have read about myself it would seem that there are some people who think that I have been a little too tough.

Would the right hon. Gentleman agree that the whole future of the Board and its ability to deal with such cases has been put at risk by the report last night of a confidential circular issued by the secretary of one of the printing unions in which alarming allegations were made of crude intervention by the Minister in the course of negotiations in which it is alleged that the Minister advised the employers not to settle and suggested that the printers were already over paid?

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for giving me the chance to deal with that matter. Obviously, a Minister in a job like mine must from time to time have talks both with the management and with the unions on a confidential basis. That does not involve interference. On the whole, I find that it is welcome when they think that it is helpful and sometimes not so wecome when they think that it is not helpful. But these talks must go on, otherwise the job cannot be done, and people should respect confidence when they ask for confidential talks.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will now state the estimated cost of the proposed new Regional Headquarters for the South-West at Bristol, the estimated annual cost of running it, and the number of extra civil servants required.

The cost of the headquarters—[Horn. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."]—I hope that I make take the cheers for the arrival of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister as a joint greeting.

Is not the First Secretary's Answer rather extraordinary? Would not one have thought that he, like any private organisation or industry not bolstered up by the taxpayer, would have gone into all these things most carefully before embarking on this scheme?

I gather that what the hon. Gentleman finds extraordinary about my Answer is that it was not the one which he thought I would make; but it is the accurate one.

Is it a fact that Bristol is the most expensive possible place to have this regional headquarters?

No, but we discussed the question of whether it should be in some other town in the South-West than Bristol the last time that I answered Questions. My view remains the same: that this is the proper place to put it.

Will the right hon. Gentle, man bear in mind the reply which he gave when we last discussed this matter when he said that he would consider having a separate headquarters in Plymouth for the extreme South-West?

I do not think that I referred to a separate headquarters, but I said that I would consider a separate sub-regional organisation. That is in my mind—if it is the wish of the people in the South-West.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what decisions the new Economic Planning Council for the South-West have taken as regards the economic development in the South-West.

The Council has held only one meeting and it is therefore too early for it to have formulated advice on economic development within the region.

Would not the Minister agree that one decision which the Council could make, and fairly urgently, is to reverse the decision of the Board of Trade which has refused industrial development certificates to small companies to come to the South-West? As the small companies are vital for economic progress, will the Council be able to do something about the matter?

If the hon. Gentleman has a specific case and he would like to refer it to my right hon. Friend or myself, we will consider it. Now that we have the Council in the region, this is a first-class piece of machinery to use for this purpose.

Will the right hon. Gentleman draw the attention of the South-West office at Bristol to the necessity for improving the carriage of freight by air in the South-West? Will he see whether it can give assistance in that respect?

Certainly. I suggest that the hon. Gentleman might ask the Council to look at that.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what plans he has to use input-output analysis in his Department's planning techniques.

We are already doing this, using the facilities of the Central Statistical Office and of the Department of Applied Economics at Cambridge.

Is my right hon. Friend aware how welcome that reply is, for which I thank him? Will he undertake to keep a close watch on development along these lines in America and Russia and the research work being done at Cambridge?

Yes. I do not want to hide from the House the fact that there is room for enormous improvement on our past practice in the provision of statistics, and we are looking at that matter now.