asked the Minister of Technology what proposals he has for encouraging the development and manufacture of highly specialised machine tools.

I have already announced proposals for supporting the development and manufacture of machine tools; these are applicable to suitable specialised machines no less than those of general application.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many small manufacturing concerns, particularly in development areas, find it very difficult and financially embarrassing to undertake new production processes with high-cost precision machine tools? Will my right hon. Friend do something, perhaps through N.R.D.C., to set in motion production projects in order to get over the teething troubles and thus help more manufacturers to adopt new processes?

Certainly the N.R.D.C. will be ready to examine these projects for small firms. Indeed, one of the main functions of N.R.D.C. is to consider problems which are not to be found outside of industry. If any worth-while project is brought forward, N.R.D.C. will look at it.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the manufacture of these articles is only the first step? The most important consideration is the fact that they should be used, and used properly. Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that those people who are due to use them are giving the Government the fullest co-operation?

Yes. There are later Questions on the Order Paper which will bring this out.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress he is making in implementing the recommendations of the machine tool industry on manufacturing for stock during recessions.

asked the Minister of Technology whether, in view of the current phase of the machine tool ordering cycle, he will take action on the anti-cyclical policies proposed by the machine tool industry.

The working party I have appointed to examine the problems of the cyclical pattern of orders for machine tools is considering a number of proposals, including manufacturing for stock during recessions and I expect to receive its report very shortly.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that it is more important to get a solution to this problem than to get the perfect one, in order to catch the machine tool cycle at the place where this kind of idea is important?

I think it is very important that we should get a solution and equally important that we should get the correct solution. Fortunately, despite the appearance that there was a turnback in orders in the early part of the year, they then climbed. We now have a little more time at our disposal, therefore, to find the correct solution.

asked the Minister of Technology what action he is taking to ensure that the presentation of information on imports of machine tool components is in a form which can be used by the machine tool industry.

Apart from a particular case, on which the hon. Member has been in correspondence with the Ministry of Technology and on which we are already trying to help, I am not aware of any dissatisfaction with the present arrangements for the presentation of this information.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary not agree that many of the Board of Trade's classifications do not give sufficient detail? For example, what use is being made of computers for trying to break down classifications into a more useful and intelligible state?

It is not one of my responsibilities to answer for the Board of Trade.

asked the Minister of Technology if he has now established a regional office in Scotland.

Yes, Sir.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the computer industries have found Scotland especially suitable for them? What is he doing to guide and assist them there?

This will be the main purpose of my right hon. Friend's regional office in Scotland, to co-ordinate these activities. For this reason the senior regional officer will sit upon the Regional Planning Board.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans have been made to publicise and promote the achievements of the British nuclear power industry, with particular reference to the advanced gas-cooled reactor; what steps he proposes to take to advance and utilise the technological resources available; and if he will make a statement.

The British nuclear power programme is by far the world's largest, both by its generating capacity and by the vast experience it has accumulated, and our overseas missions are doing their best to make these facts widely known.

Visits by overseas visitors to A.E.A. and C.E.G.B. installations are also encouraged; and the A.E.A. in collaboration with industry has participated in such important exhibitions as the recent one at Tokyo.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask him whether he will take into account the fact that there is a very strong demand for his Ministry to combine its resources with those of the Atomic Energy Authority and the industry in order to make clear to the rest of the world what our achievements are in British nuclear power?

That is quite so. The Atomic Energy Authority is working to improve further the advanced gas-cooled reactor and is actually assisting the British nuclear power industry with its commercial offers to other countries overseas.

Would not the cost of large capital plant like the advanced gas-cooled reactor be greatly reduced if the Central Electricity Generating Board could be induced to issue repeat orders instead of asking for each station to be one-off?

There is no doubt that if there were long runs at each station there would be a possibility of a reduction in cost. This subject is under review by the C.E.G.B. and the Atomic Energy Authority. In the experimental growth period it is necessary to seek the best form of energy creation.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will set up an inquiry into the uses of public purchasing in technological advance; and how far this would be in the public interest.

I have already arranged for an inter-departmental inquiry into this matter to be put in hand.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is he aware that the Government spend very large sums of money each year, some of which could surely be used for purchasing, which would help technological advance?

This is, of course, the whole subject of the exercise and the inquiry. Large sums of money are involved, but there is a good deal of complication about the variety of purchasing, which therefore needs detailed study.

Could the right hon. Gentleman answer the second part of his hon. Friend's Question, which was how far he thought this would be in the public interest?

I would not have set up an inquiry into the subject had I not thought that it was in the public interest.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps he is taking to ensure the widest possible dissemination of information from Government-sponsored or Government-supported research establishments and associations.

I have established a strong regional organisation one of whose main tasks is to promote the more vigorous application by industry of new scientific and technical knowledge resulting from research financed or sponsored by the Government. Information on the very wide variety of means used to inform industry of their work is contained in the Annual Reports of my Department's Research Stations and of the Research Associations, which are available in the Library of the House.

Would my right hon Friend ensure that the research associations, such as the Production Engineering Research Association, do not limit the supply of their information to those firms which can afford to make a financial contribution to their organisation, as in this way those firms which are most in need of the information would be prevented from getting it?

This is a valid point, and we are particularly examining it and the method by which we shall disseminate information through our establishments.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress has been made in the establishment of regional advisory offices.

The establishment of Ministry of Technology regional offices is almost complete. New offices were opened during October at Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Manchester and Nottingham. These join the former D.S.I.R. Branch Offices at Edinburgh, Cardiff and Newcastle-upon-Tyne, which have been strengthened and given wider responsibilities. One further office for South East England and East Anglia will be opened early next year.

Does my hon. Friend recognise that this Answer will, in some measure, give the lie to the charge that his Ministry has been doing nothing? Perhaps he would spell out in greater detail than he has done hitherto the functions of his regional offices——

The hon. Member must ask a Question.

Can my hon. Friend say what functions the offices have in respect of co-ordination with the universities and technical colleges? Would he consider the laying of a White Paper to spell out in greater detail what he has announced today?

I will consider my hon. Friend's last point. The answer to his other question is that by the end of 1967 the Ministry will have set up a network of about 70 liaison centres, with the job of co-ordinating the activities of industry, education and the Government. The regional officers will be represented on the regional planning bodies.

asked the Minister of Technology what recommendations he is making to industry to bring about the standardisation of screw threads.

I am giving full support to the statement issued on 23rd November by the British Standards Institution urging industry to use the metric screw thread system agreed by the International Standards Organisation, and gradually to replace the purely British systems that are not recognised by many of our overseas customers. I do not consider that any further general recommendations to industry are needed at this stage, but, with permission, I will circulate a more detailed statement of the present position in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, in 1949, the International Organisation for Standardisation, to which Britain was a party, recommended the unified inch system, in which industry invested vast sums of capital? What effect will this decision have on our trading relations with North America, which decided to stick to the British system?

I am aware of the decision in 1949, and of that taken in 1964 as a result of more than 10 years' study. We took the decision to change over because, on balance, it means that we shall be able to sell more in the countries where we normally do our trading. It is true that America is staying with the unified thread, but there is a strong feeling in British industry that we should convert.

asked the Minister of Technology to what extent the work of the National Research Development Corporation has expanded in 1965; and if he will make a statement.

The main expansion has been in the number and value of development projects financed by the Corporation. At the end of June, 1965 the Corporation had in hand 95 such projects as compared with the 60 at the end of June 1964. Since then 17 new projects have been authorised and a further 120 are under assessment.

The Corporation's forward commitments on development projects now amount to more than £8 million which is a six-fold increase on the corresponding figure last year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the public relations side of his Ministry needs improving and that those responsible must pull their finger out? Would he state the amount of advances in the previous year as against the current year?

The question whether the Department needs to improve its public relations is one upon which there may be differences of opinion. I have always thought that the more effective way of doing a job was to do it rather than talk about it, but this is a matter of opinion. As to the comparison between the advances, the total up to April, 1965, was £1,510,000, for the six months, and the total for the 12 months to June, 1964, was £710,000.

asked the Minister of Technology what is his policy with regard to the establishment of a national computing centre; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will establish a national computer programming centre in Scotland.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he will now make a statement on the powers, functions and composition of the National Computer Centre.

I would ask hon. Members to await the statement which I hope to make following Questions.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will state the terms of the contracts between the National Research Development Corporation, International Computers and Tabulators Limited and Elliot-Automation; and what profit will accrue to the Exchequer under these contracts.

No, Sir. Details of its contracts are a matter for the Corporation and, in accordance with normal commercial practice, are confidential to the parties concerned. As regards the second part of the Question, any profit will accrue to the Corporation and not to the Exchequer.

Would my right hon. Friend look at this again? Does he not agree that, even if profit accrues to the Corporation, that is an improvement on the practice of the previous Administration, who were in the habit of giving large doles to private enterprise with no prospect whatsoever of recovery? Will he take the matter further by considering the possibility of acquiring a share in the equity of these companies?

I suggest that the latter part of my hon. Friend's question is a different question. It is a separate one which needs a specific answer, and if one is to be given to it, it should be put down separately. On the second point, I am not sure what I am being asked to look at again. Having said that it does not accrue to us but to the Corporation, if it is suggested that it should accrue to the Exchequer, it should be remembered that when the Development of Inventions Bill was going through the House, we agreed a Clause which said it would be possible for me to direct revenue back to the Treasury if this were really important.

In view of the answer which the Parliamentary Secretary gave to Question No. 10, would the Minister not agree that there is some danger of the N.R.D.C. being overloaded financially in respect of computers and perhaps not having sufficient money available for other projects?

I hope that there is no such possibility. One of the things we have to do is to strengthen the N.R.D.C. At the same time, we must make money available in order that it can cope with the projects. It must be able to deal with these things when they arise.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman confirm that, so far from the insinuation in the first part of the question by the hon. Member for Putney (Mr. Hugh Jenkins) being correct, the truth is that the National Research Development Corporation, to which the Question refers, has always had to make the best possible profit and keep it to itself?

The right hon. Gentleman will recall that when we were discussing the N.R.D.C., I paid a compliment not only to the right hon. Gentleman himself for the association he had with N.R.D.C. but to the fact that it was a very efficient organisation, which had done the best it could with the money. We were asking for more money.

asked the Minister of Technology whether, in view of the high turnover of staff and pace of work on Hovercraft development, he is satisfied with the management of this work; and if he will make a statement.

I assume that my hon. Friend is referring to Hovercraft Development Ltd., the subsidiary company of N.R.D.C. The management of this is the responsibility of the company and the Corporation. I understand that they intend to maintain the level of development work generally and to expand it in some particulars, and for this purpose they are actively seeking to replace recent losses of staff.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the Hovercraft and Hovertrain may form some of the major transport facilities in the future? Will he ensure that there is no slackening of development and that adequate direction of design and construct on work is being provided? Will he also consider setting up a State-owned company to buy and operate this means of travel to ensure that we can cope with foreign competition?

Again, I must suggest that the last part of that supplementary should represent a Question in its own right, and perhaps my hon. Friend will put one down. It is certainly not a matter which one can answer in reply to a supplementary. On the question of whether we should set up a rival company, I am already on record as saying that where bodies of this kind fail the nation I would have no hesitation in bringing the matter before the. House, but that is an entirely different question. On the other part of my hon. Friend's supplementary, I am also on record as being in support of the hover-type movement itself and saying that we should he ready to give what aid is needed.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps he is taking to increase the number and improve the quality of designs of industrial machines in those industries which are sponsored by his Department, with a view to making the United Kingdom more competitive in world markets.

The Ministry of Technology is acting upon the recommendations of the Feilden Committee on engineering design, which have the aim of raising the general quality of design throughout British industry.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that in the printing industry, for example, machine supplies are dominated by Germany, due not to a lack of material or skill on our part but to a lack of design? Will he try to do something about this?

My right hon. Friend is very well aware of this type of problem. Without being committed on the specific point mentioned by my hon. Friend, a great deal of work is being done, particularly in the sphere of machine tools, with increased research and development, pre-production contracts and numerical control. A great deal of assistance is being offered.

asked the Minister of Technology in view of the need to accelerate the research programme designed to give luxury electric rail traction at 200 miles per hour, if he will restrict the Hovertrain development programme.

asked the Minister of Technology whether, in view of the decision of Bertin et Cie to produce a working Hovertrain on a five-mile track, he will accelerate the Hovertrain development programme in Great Britain.

As the Question from my hon. Friend the Member for Tottenham (Mr. Atkinson) indicates, Hovertrains are not the only form of high speed tracked transport, and before we can decide what effort to put into this development, the various technical, economic and social factors involved must be evaluated.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that the development of electric traction in this country has been hampered to a great extent by a lack of research funds? Would he not also agree that the possible development of electric traction is far more exciting and revolutionary than anything yet known in terms of pneumatic vehicles? Should he not, therefore, be more decisive in giving the go ahead to electrical engineers to get on with the job of developing electric traction?

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Transport is considering proposals for conducting studies in this sphere. One is tempted to agree that there is, certainly in the short term, the possibility of there being a great deal more likelihood of success in this sphere than with the Hovertrain within a densely populated area such as this.

Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind when considering these matters that there is still scope for technology in ensuring that trains which travel at 60 m.p.h. arrive on time?

asked the Minister of Technology whether, in view of his decision to sponsor the development of hydrostatic extrusion techniques, he will sponsor the essentially related research and development of cemented carbides and ceramic extrusion dies.

My right hon. Friend is aware of the need for the development of dies which will withstand the higher temperatures which may arise in improved extrusion processes in the future and hopes shortly to make an announcement about further work in this field.

I thank my hon. Friend for that constructive Answer. Is he aware that, in terms of hydrostatic extrusion development, this may prove to be an exciting development for the engineering industry and that we are not far away from the day when many thousands of engineering components will be extruded in this way like toothpaste? Will he, therefore, give an assurance that additional money—in addition to the £300,000 already allocated—will be made available for this work so that the development of the die part of the system can be completed?

I agree with my hon. Friend that this is an extremely important development indeed. It could be construed as being virtually nothing less than the development of an entirely new type of machine tool of considerable value. In Birmingham, to give one example, a great deal of research is being done. For this and allied research, contracts for research and development worth about £192,000 have already been placed. If we were successful in this sphere—and I think that we will be—Britain could lead the world in this development.

asked the Minister of Technology how many scientists and skilled engineers have at their own request left employment in Government research establishments since October 1964; how many of these have since been replaced by new recruits; and if he will make a statement about the nature of the work to be done in these establishments in the future.

Since October, 1964, some 200 members of the Scientific Officer, Experimental Officer and Works Professional grades have left employment in the research establishments for which my right hon. Friend is responsible. In the same period, about 240 new appointments have been made in these grades. These establishments will continue to undertake research, development and advisory work to assist industry and public departments.

If the hon. Gentleman and his Department are really anxious to assist in accelerating the modernisation of British industry, will they do nothing to interrupt the momentum of research in the establishments for which the hon. Gentleman is departmentally responsible? Does he not agree that basic research is basic and that it cannot be parcelled up as between military and civil projects?

I do not think that one need quarrel with the hon. Gentleman's proposition that basic research is basic. I assure him that it is the intention of the Ministry to assist the work of the research departments.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will commission an independent study to report on the degree of effective computer utilisation in the United Kingdom and publish the evidence and conclusions such a study will reveal.

My right hon. Friend recognises the importance of computer installations being effectively utilised and he is already taking steps through the Computer Advisory Service and otherwise to promote this. But he considers that a study on the lines suggested is neither necessary nor practicable.

While thanking the Parliamentary Secretary for that Answer, may I ask him if he is aware that the Mackenzie and other studies have shown that, due to managerial problems, there has been an ineffective use of computers in America? Since we cannot afford that sort of wastage in this country, would it not be wise to anticipate that problem before it arises?

We entirely accept the importance of looking at this matter and dealing with it. My only quarrel, if there be one, with the hon. Gentleman is on whether this type of inquiry is possible or necessary for this job. A great deal can be done in this sphere and a great deal is being done now.

Would my hon. Friend assure the House that the training effort which is needed in all aspects of the computer industry is receiving the full support of his Department?

The training effort in this and in all other spheres is receiving the full support of the Government and the Ministry of Technology in particular.

asked the Minister of Technology what proposals he has for assessing the relative competence and technological status of firms on the basis of readily available standardised information.

None, Sir.

Does the hon. Gentleman recall that on 13th November he himself suggested that this was desirable? If he thought that it was desirable on 13th November, why is he not now setting about doing it?

The hon. Gentleman must read my speeches more carefully. I said on that day:

"Ideally what is needed is a method of assessing the relative competence and technological status of firms on the basis of readily available standardised information".

I am sure that, on reflection, the hon. Gentlema a will agree that even the Labour Party takes some time before it can become entirely ideal.

asked the Minister of Technology by what criteria he will determine what constitutes an independent British computer industry.

I regard an independent British computer industry as consisting of firms whose policies in respect of production, research and development are determined in this country.

If the right hon. Gentleman is satisfied that these criteria will enable him to determine individual companies, could he record these in the OFFICIAL REPORT so that we may trace their commercial fortunes since the arrival of the Labour Government?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps he proposes to take to implement his policy of seeing that the British computer industry is not dependent technologically on foreign industry.

I would refer the hon. Member to my Answer of 30th November to the hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford (Mr. Kenneth Lewis) in which I set out the steps the Government are taking to assist the development of the computer industry.

Does the Minister not realise that the computer industry is one in which there will be a growing degree of specialisation, and that it is sheer pie in the sky to imagine that the British or any other country's computer industry can be independent of foreign technological resources?

Would the hon. Gentleman like to quote me any place where I have said that we could be completely independent of foreign technology?

Answer.

Order. The right hon. Gentleman has answered the supplementary question.

asked the Minister of Technology what study he has made of investment incentives in the field of technology; and if he will make a statement.

Investment incentives in the field of technology are part of the wider question of incentives to promote industrial investment and modernisation generally which is being examined by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. My Department, as sponsor for a wide range of engineering industries, is closely concerned in this examination.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that his Department has a particularly important rôle to play in this regard; that it is not sufficient just to have investment but that investment should also lead to modernisation, and that the view of the Department headed by him is surely of considerable importance in this respect?

I thought that I had made it quite clear that mine is one of the Departments most closely involved in this matter, and is engaged in discussions with the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say when the review will be completed? Can he assure the House that it will be completed before the next Budget?

Questions relating to the timing of the review should surely be addressed to my right hon. Friend.

asked the Minister of Technology what is the estimated number of programmers able to design compilers and systems analysts able to design systems for the control of organisations and processes currently employed in the United Kingdom; and what is the expected rise in demand for these skills during the period outlined by the National Plan.

A precise estimate is not available, but the evidence in my possession suggests that the number is of the order of 100 or so. At least three times as many is likely to be necessary by 1970 to meet the expected demand.

The Minister said at Eastbourne that there was need to take special action. Is he proposing to take special action to see that the supply is there when necessary?

Yes, Sir. The Government are taking special action on this matter. Following our initiative, an official working group is being set up by the Department of Education and Science to consider, as a matter of urgency, action to improve the supply of trained computer personnel at all levels in the educational service. It has to be made clear that people at this level cannot be trained quickly, and it is a great pity that the problem was not recognised earlier.

Will my hon. Friend consider instructing this working group at the Department of Education and Science to enlarge the scope of its inquiry so as to include the possibility of providing computers at secondary modern schools, comprehensive schools and grammar schools? Unless we train our younger people in the use of computers, we shall never have enough people to use the new technology.

That is very much another question.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he has approved the decision of the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority to enter tenders to build a nuclear power station in Finland; and if he will encourage further efforts to obtain export orders of this type.

Yes, Sir. Every encouragement will be given to efforts to obtain exports of this type.

Can my right hon. Friend say how many tenders were submitted by other nations, what was the total cost involved, and whether he expects further orders of this particular kind in future?

There were seven tenders other than the tender put in by the U.K.A.E.A. I am not able to answer the inquiry on total cost because, at the moment, this matter is confidential to the parties concerned.

Is the Minister satisfied that this is a legitimate activity for the A.E.A., or does he not feel that the consortia, which have traditionally made this kind of tender from the United Kingdom, should themselves be encouraged to go into exports?

I think it very much a legitimate activity of the Atomic Energy Authority.

asked the Minister of Technology to what extent his new duties in connection with the mechanical and electrical engineering industries will involve prior consultation with other Government Departments seeking to place orders with these industries; and to what extent change will be necessary in the ordering procedure of the Atomic Energy Authority and the nationalised power industries, in particular, and the civil field in general.

As I stated in reply to the hon. Member's question of 29th November, the Ministry of Technology, as sponsoring Department, is prepared in appropriate cases to consult with other Departments over the placing of their orders. This practice will not be affected by the extension of my Department's duties, though the range involved will be considerably larger.

Will the right hon. Gentleman recall that over the years there has been built up a very considerable confidence between the regional offices of the Board of Trade and the D.S.I.R. people working jointly with them in the regions? Is there not a great danger that all that will happen as a result of his activities will be that we shall have yet another Department coining into the picture, thereby causing further delay?

There is certainly no justification at all for any assumption that this will widen the range of consideration. We hope to be as close to the industries for which we are the sponsor as any previous Governments have been.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps are being taken in the Merseyside development district to develop and expand scientifically-based industries; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend has no proposals of this kind for Merseyside at present, but we have these problems constantly in mind and will inform Parliament of specific proposals as they arise.

Is my hon. Friend aware that his reply will be received with disappointment on Merseyside? Is he also aware that there is very great concern on Merseyside that the expanding developments in the technological industry are being siphoned away from Merseyside, and that we are being left with the minor, and to some extent the dying, parts of technological development?

I would not accept my hon. Friend's last point. I think he would agree that the right way of dealing with this is by the system of regional planning introduced by this Government. The Ministry's regional organisation has recently been strengthened and is playing a full part on the regional boards. I think that any proposals made on that basis would certainly have the sympathetic consideration of the Ministry.

asked the Minister of Technology how many times his Department, as sponsor for the industry concerned, has intervened in the placing of orders by other Departments; what were the cost, nature and other Departments concerned in each case; and what are the circumstances in which, after his approval has been given, implementation is still dependent upon Treasury approval of the necessary expenditure.

The details of the consultations between my Department, the purchasing Departments and the Treasury are confidential to the Government and it would be contrary to well-established practice to give information of the kind requested.

Even if the right hon. Gentleman cannot give me the number of times when the Treasury has interfered, surely he can answer the other half of the Question which is of considerable concern, as to how much he has been brought into consultation, and what the projects were?

I am sorry, but it is not proper for the hon. Gentleman to say "even if I cannot give an answer on the number of times the Treasury has interfered". This is not the purpose of the Treasury. The purpose of the Treasury is to examine costings, and to discuss them with other Ministries in order to reach satisfactory conclusions.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will estimate the cost in a full year of excluding the first £500 of any capital gain from capital gains tax.

It is not possible to make an estimate. The cost would depend on the extent to which taxpayers took advantage of the exemption by spreading their realisations of capital gains.

Has the Chancellor studied the views of the London Stock Exchange on this issue? Does he realise that a concession of this nature would probably do more than anything else to encourage the flow of investments and savings which he says he so much desires?

Everything that comes from the Stock Exchange demands my constant and earnest attention. I can promise the hon. Member that I will consider its memorandum with very great care. As to the flow of savings, the hon. Member will be happy to know that it is running at a very high level again this year.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the temporary surcharge on imports will be finally removed.

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to the debate on 29th November.

Is the Chancellor aware that the continued use of the import charge is providing artificial protection to British industry, is probably discouraging exports, and does not make credible his own statement that the British economy is now on a safe footing?

That sounds to me like a frustrated export from last week's debate. I assure the hon. Gentleman that, far from saying that the British economy is safe, I have been in the forefront, with my other colleagues in the Government, in insisting that we need a continual improvement in our balance of payments before we can say that the economy is wholly safe. I think that that end can be attained if we continue on the path which we have set ourselves.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much revenue was produced for the Echequer by the temporary import surcharge in its first year.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given to the hon. Member for Worcester (Mr. Peter Walker) on 25th November.

Is not this now a half-concealed extra tax upon the consumer?

The figure of £169 million is within the margin of error of last April's forecast, and clearly extra revenue must be of the nature of an additional tax, but this does not seem to me to raise any new point over and above those we discussed last April.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the adverse effect that the high rate of Purchase Tax on English cricket balls is having on this craft; and if he will reduce the level of tax.

Representations have recently been made on this subject and my right hon. Friend will bear them in mind when Purchase Tax is next under review.

Is the Financial Secretary aware that the price of a cricket ball now is £3 2s. 9d.—[Laughter.]—and that, as an ordinary cricket club uses two a day in a match—[HON. MEMBERS: "The hon. Gentleman's team would be out before that."]—it is extremely—

Order. This is a serious English question.

Does not the hon. and learned Gentleman realise that the present price is quite prohibitive for some of the smaller cricket clubs, which are now being forced to import cheaper balls from abroad, and this is very detrimental to British trade?

Any reduction in the rate of tax would have to apply to imported no less than to home-produced cricket balls. If I may put it in this way, cricket balls have to be Gattable as well as battable.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is satisfied that, with new burdens being placed on the Inland Revenue valuation staff, it will be possible to undertake the rating valuation of property due in 1968; and if he will make a statement.

I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Housing and Local Government on 2nd December to a Question by the hon. Member for Cleveland (Mr. Tinn).

Is not the real reason for the postponement of the 1968 revaluation the immense burden placed upon Inland Revenue valuers by the complications of the Finance Act, in respect of which many of them have had no adequate guidance whatever?

There is no question of lack of guidance. It is right that there had to be an assessment of which were the most important priorities and, of course, there will be at least as important work for the valuers to do following both the Finance Act and the setting up of the Land Commission.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the policy of Her Majesty's Government towards requests from Governments of developing countries in the Commonwealth for a United Kingdom Treasury guarantee in respect of a loan to be floated publicly in London by that Commonwealth Government.

No such requests have been received, but I do not think that providing finance for the developing countries by way of Treasury guarantee would, on balance, present any advantage over the present arrangements.

Does not the Chancellor realise that an approach has been made to his right hon. Friend the Minister for Overseas Development and that it has, so far, been turned down on the ground that it would create an undesirable precedent? Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that it might be a very good way of getting development funds to the developing countries?

That seems to be a series of assertions without much argument behind it. So far, I cannot see what the advantage is.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the substantial increase in the market value of houses, he will seek to exempt the homes of owner-occupiers for Estate Duty purposes; and if he will estimate the annual cost of this relief.

No, Sir. The cost might be £25 million.

Is the hon. and learned Gentleman aware of the considerable increase in the value of owner-occupied houses during the past 10 years and of the hardship which can be caused, for instance, to widows who have to stay on in their houses after the death of their spouses? Will he consider a partial extension on, say, the first £5,000 of the value of owner-occupied houses?

There is already an Estate Duty exemption in respect of estates not amounting to more than £5,000, and I understand that, historically, the reason for allowing it was the one to which the hon. Gentleman referred.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the repayment of post-war credits.

I have no statement to make at present.

Does not the Chancellor appreciate that, 20 years after the end of the war, there is still £224 million worth of post-war credits, plus interest of over £36 million waiting to be repaid? Is it not time that he had some plans to hand this money back to the taxpayer?

If the country's finances had been handed over to us in a better state, I might have been able to make more progress.