asked the Minister of Technology what steps he is taking to encourage the major firms in the British computer industry to coordinate their research and marketing divisions.

The work and organisation of their research and marketing divisions is essentially a matter for the computer manufacturers concerned. My Department keeps in touch with the major computer manufacturers, however, and draws their attention to opportunities for co-ordination and collaboration, especially in research.

In view of the fact that one country and one company in that country dominates the computer market, will my right hon. Friend bear in mind the need to get more economies of scale into the British industry to enable us to compete effectively?

This is, of course, part of the approach which we have made to the computer industry as a whole and to particular countries. We know that a comparable computer industry could be created in this country to take care of the problem which my hon. Friend raises.

asked the Minister of Technology what initiatives have been taken to press the sale of British advanced gas-cooled reactors in the United States of America, in view of the decision of the United States Atomic Energy Commission to abandon their experimental gas-cooled reactor at Oak Ridge and the failure of the Dragon-type reactors at Peach Bottom and Colorado.

Every opportunity is taken to ensure that potential customers both in the United States of America and elsewhere are kept fully informed of the success of advanced gas-cooled reactors in the United Kingdom. For commercial reasons it would not be appropriate for me to comment at this stage on the further initiatives which are in hand or under consideration.

I thank the Minister for his answer, but would he assure the House that the decision of the Atomic Energy Commission in America to withdraw the experiment in the gas-cooled reactor does not imply a lack of confidence in the concept? Will he, therefore, seek to exploit Britain's remarkable lead in this respect, particularly with our advanced gas-cooled reactor, with its opportunities for export and its contribution to the power supply programme?

Of course, I would not want to attempt to answer for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, although our information is that their problems are not as great as has been suggested in some quarters. But the main point is that, on the basis of the highly successful exploitation of gas-cooled systems in this country, we have every reason for continued confidence. We shall make this known as widely as we can.

In view of the fact that the Oak Ridge project has a writing-down time of 30 years and that Dungeness has a 20-year depreciation, will the Minister press very hard on the European Nuclear Energy Agency for a common criterion on all these points?

There are further Questions on this, but we are responsible for our own decisions about writing-down time.

asked the Minister of Technology what action his department is taking to increase workers' participation in the industries for which he is responsible, with a view to encouraging increased productivity, general efficiency and an improved industrial environment; and whether he will make a statement.

My Department is represented on the Economic Development Committees for the industries for which I am now responsible. I regard these committees as a very important means for encouraging workers' participation in economic planning and in solving the particular problems of their industries.

I thank the Minister for that sympathetic reply, but could he take the matter a little further? Would he agree that the question of participation by workers in management and productivity schemes requires more than sympathetic interest by the E.D.C.s and that we need this kind of participation if we are to make a more effective incomes and prices policy, not to speak of achieving an industrial democracy, which this party is aiming for?

Yes, of course, it needs considerably more than just an examination by the little Neddies. It needs, in fact, a change of attitude by some people towards workers' participation. Very frequently, managements regard the workers as not being entitled to participate in examinations but only to be told what examinations have taken place. We have been trying for years to remedy this situation.

Arising out of the Minister's original reply, could he say what exactly is the rôle of the representatives of his Department on the Economic Development Committees? Are they there in a listening capacity or a participating one?

They are there in a fully participating capacity. As the hon. Gentleman will be aware, these bodies are non-executive: they examine and report back. But my representatives take a full part in them.

asked the Minister of Technology on how many occasions since October, 1964 the Atomic Energy Authority has tendered for capital construction work, including research reactors and power station reactors worth over £50,000; what was the total value of these tenders; how many have been for export; how many have resulted in firm orders; if he will tabulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT the value of each tender which resulted in a firm order, give the name and customer and country in each case, name the main sub-contractors and the value of the sub-contracted work; and to what extent it is Government policy for the Atomic Energy Authority to expand its construction department.

The Authority has recently submitted tenders to two Finnish electricity undertakings. This is the first time such action has been taken and details must, for commercial reasons, remain confidential to the parties concerned. If these tenders are successful, the construction and manufacture of equipment will be carried out by industry. Every encouragement will be given to the Authority's efforts to obtain export orders of this kind.

I thank the Minister for that reply. Does it mean that the A.E.A. is setting up in competition against the consortia? Since there is a debate today on rationalisation, would he set an example by persuading the A.E.A. to concentrate on research and leave commercial matters to other hands?

No, I certainly would not take that step. It is not in competition with them. It has the authority to do a job which I spoke about in the House some time ago. At the moment it is the only body which is able to put forward proposals and tenders for the S.G.H.W.R. Therefore, it would be improper for me to try to prevent that from happening—and surely all hon. Members want the Atomic Energy Authority to get these orders if it can.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress has been made in research into the large scale desalination of sea water for purposes of public water supply; and whether he will make a statement.

I cannot add anything further at present to the reply I gave the hon. Member for Poole (Mr. Murton) on 26th October.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, in view of the very large prospective increased demand on the public water supply, any money that he spends on research into desalinisation will repay itself many times? Will he please press on with this and give the House some idea of what is being done at present?

I am certainly very conscious of the importance of this. It may not have escaped the notice of hon. Members that, when reporting on this issue, I mentioned that it was not just the arid countries, the deserts, which needed water, but the industrial countries. In some parts of this country, we are short of water. We are pressing on with this matter, and we have discussed with Weir Westgarth and others the things that can be done. It should be remembered that a design study for a 30 million gallons a day plant using flash distillation techniques has been completed in conjunction with that company and that we are pressing on to see whether this is really a commercial proposition.

asked the Minister of Technology what increase was obtained by the United Kingdom electronic components industry in production and exports in 1965 compared with 1964.

Increases in exports obtained by the electronic components industry between 1964 and 1965 amounted to 15 per cent. for valves, tubes and semiconductors, where the figure rose from £12·4 million to £14·2 million and to just over 30 per cent. for resistors, capacitors and transformers, where the figure rose from £3·5 million to £4·6 million. There are at present no complete statistics of production for the industry.

While thanking my hon. Friend for giving those encouraging figures, may I ask him to say what steps his Ministry is taking to ensure that these are increased even further, particularly since we have the capacity in British industry to export the very things mentioned in the Question?

The industry is entitled to be congratulated for its extremely good performance during the past year. However, there is still a great deal more that we can do from the point of view of the country and the industry to make ourselves even more competitive.

In view of the interest there is in this subject, would the hon. Gentleman represent to his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade the desirability of collecting these statistics so that one may determine to what extent they are accounted for by British companies which are the subsidiaries of American parents?

I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the keeping of statistics in this sphere is not satisfactory at present. That is being reviewed now with a view to putting them on a better footing, although I cannot resist returning to the point that it is a pity the statistics were not reviewed a long time ago.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress is now being made in the establishment of a national data processing establishment with a computer field.

The possibilities of establishing a national data processing centre are being studied.

Would the Minister not agree that the establishment of such an organisation would be of great benefit to industry and commerce in making them more aware of the great benefits which can be derived from this sort of service?

I certainly accept that this is a valuable contribution to make and that the knowledge to be gained by industry would be extremely useful. However, a great deal has yet to be learned about the idea of a central data processing system. Hon. Members who have been to America, as has my opposite number on the Front Bench opposite, will agree that a lot remains to be done with M.A.C.

asked the Minister of Technology how many nuclear energy computer programmes this country provides to the European Nuclear Energy Agency establishment at Ispra; and what is the cost of these.

Nuclear energy computer programmes collected by the Ispra Establishment relate solely to fundamental scientific and engineering problems in the nuclear field. The United Kingdom has provided 32 such programmes at a negligible cost.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for saying that it is a negligible cost. Will he accept that out of the 272 programmes which have been made available to Ispra, it is a pity that we have had such a small proportion? Is he aware that this could be potentially very big business for this country in the next five years?

I certainly would not accept that our contribution has been such a very small one. If one takes all the E.N.E.A. countries and bears in mind that about 121 programmes have been submitted by all of them and that of those 32 came from the United Kingdom, that is a fairly good proportion.

asked the Minister of Technology what reply he has sent to the letter of the hon. Member for Weston-super-Mare regarding the number of computer programmes that have been sent to the European Nuclear Energy Agency establishment at Ispra.

I have sent a detailed reply to the hon. Member's letter of 9th February.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply, which I received about one minute ago. Considering that 699 programmes have been offered—of which the hon. Gentleman stated earlier that one-tenth had been offered by this country—is he aware that, as we are one of the leading countries in the nuclear energy sphere, this is not good enough?

To answer the last point made by the hon. Gentleman, one should not go to too much trouble to underplay the achievements of this country. There are 11 countries in E.N.E.A., and three of them are major ones in these activities. I repeat that our contribution is good and that we hope to increase our proportion of programmes offered, but I would not like to say, without notice of the question being given, by how much. The important thing to bear in mind is the number of programmes accepted.

asked the Minister of Technology what estimates exist of the number of men it would be possible to replace by the use of numerically controlled machine tools; and how many men it is estimated have been displaced in 1965.

For a considerable time to come, numerically controlled machine tools, so far from replacing men, will be required to enable industry to meet the essential need for increased production in the face of serious shortages of skilled manpower, and to achieve the increased efficiency necessary to make this country competitive in world markets.

What assessment has my hon. Friend's Department made of the need for numerically controlled machine tools in this country and what recommendations is it making to the machine tool industry in this regard?

It is difficult to arrive at a precise assessment of the need. There is clearly a great deal more room for an increase in the use of numerically controlled machine tools. One of the important things to get across, as I said in my original Answer, is that the introduction of numerically controlled machine tools and other automated systems does not endanger the employment of men. In fact, this will not involve any redundancies.

Would the Minister also make it clear that numerically controlled machines are useful in only about 5 per cent. of cases? Is it not the case that for long, high productivity runs numerically controlled machine tools have no use at all? Would he not also draw attention to the fact that the British machine tool industry has more numerically controlled machine tools in use pro rata than the United States' machine tool industry? Will he also inform his hon. Friends that the British machine tool industry has organised an exhibition of numerically controlled machine tools at Olympia from 2nd to 9th May, which they should visit?

The last point made by the hon. Gentleman is quite true. An exhibition is to take place and my Ministry is assisting in it. It would be a mistake to believe that numerically controlled machine tools or any other such method will provide the answer to our problems. However, it is certainly a major factor which we must get used on a much wider scale than has been the case in the past.

rose—

Order. We must improve our productivity on technology Questions.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress has been made with the mono-wheel-drive tractor initiated by the National Institute of Agricultural Engineers; and what discussions have taken place concerning its commercial exploitation.

Discussions are now in progress between the National Research Development Corporation and a commercial firm for the licensing of this invention for production. The first stage however will probably be the production of prototypes for trials under the auspices of the Ministry of Overseas Development.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on that first-class reply. Is he aware that this is one of the outstanding illustrations of what the Labour Party promised in their manifesto, in which it was stated that a Labour Government would make provision for and use their resources on developing ideas of this kind? Would my hon. Friend look into the possibility of exhibiting this at the Leipzig Spring Fair?

Would it not save the time of the House, when the object of a supplementary question from an hon. Gentleman opposite is simply to congratulate the Government, for him simply to say, "Supplementary No. 1"?

asked the Minister of Technology, what is his policy regarding the co-operation with foregin investors by the National Research Development Corporation in joint projects based in the United Kingdom.

There are at present no N.R.D.C. projects of this kind, but any proposals for such projects will be considered on their merits.

Will not the Minister agree that, in the interest of getting European co-operation on the technological front, he should only welcome any attempts made by foreign investors with venture capital to work in conjunction with the N.R.D.C.?

It is very difficult to give an answer on this subject without having a particular case in front of us. If the hon. Gentleman has in mind the fact that certain people try to invest money simply in order to have control without any question of development, that is a dangerous position. But it is not easy to see how the N.R.D.C. could say that it would not consider projects because they had foreign capital in them.

Can the Minister assure the House that if any European companies wanted to take a small participation in something in this country the N.R.D.C. would not automatically exclude them?

Certainly. It would not only not exclude them but welcome them, and there are projects which we consider.

asked the Minister of Technology what action he is taking in respect of the recommendations contained in paragraphs 12, 13, 14, and 286 of the Flowers Committee Report, Command Paper No. 2883, to the effect that large United States computers should be installed at the regional centres in London, Manchester and Edinburgh.

Discussions have been held with British computer manufacturers about the way in which the need for a number of large computers for the universities and other users might be met by the development of British-made machines.

In view of the difficulty which Control Data Computer Company is having with its large computer at C.E.R.N., and in view of the statement by I.B.M. that it is not prepared to hire its computers but only accept firm orders for purchase, will the Minister consider whether or not there is now a case for having them made in the United Kingdom?

We have, as hon. Members opposite know, pressed all the time for the right of British computer manufacturers to supply our needs, but the suggestion that they should supply all our needs is something which I think neither side of the House would accept. In the discussion of the Flowers Report, it was accepted that they could supply the medium and small computers but that some of the larger ones could not be supplied by them. We are hoping to encourage large computer production by the manufacturers involved.

asked the Minister of Technology if he has received a report on the cyclical pattern of machine tool ordering from the working party appointed to study this subject; and if he will make a statement.

I expect to receive the working party's report within the next few weeks. I shall consider making a statement when I have received it.

Is the Minister aware that that is a thoroughly unsatisfactory and disappointing Answer? Is he aware that on 7th December he told us that he expected to receive this Report "very shortly"? Is he aware that he is establishing an unhappily ponderous and disappointing gestation period for reports of the Ministry of Technology?

As what could be described as a final draft Report has not yet been agreed by the members of the working party, it is obviously impossible for me to talk about it, but I have said that I intend to bring this Report forward as soon as it can possibly be done. As one would expect, hon. Members on both sides have asked me to give the closest consideration to the matter before taking decisions, because of the complicated nature of the problems facing the machine tool industry.

asked the Minister of Technology if he has received the conclusions of the interdepartmental inquiry initiated by his Department on the use of public purchasing to promote technological advance; and if he will make a statement.

The possibilities of using public purchasing to promote technological advance will be the subject of continuing interdepartmental study. I will bear in mind the desirability of making a statement at the appropriate time.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we have noted with great interest that technological considerations may be one of the matters attracting the employment of funds by the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation? Will he therefore consider the desirability of making public the finding of this interdepartmental inquiry so that we can better judge the criteria by which the Government hope to employ their funds?

As is known by both sides, when an inquiry is conducted by officials it is normally accepted as confidential to Ministers, but that does not mean that at some stage the findings will not be made known in some appropriate report and information put in front of this House. But this is not a single report, but a comprehensive and continuing report, of which there are some aspects that no one would think of bringing forward to the House.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he will make a statement on his visits to, and the work done at, the Government research stations for which his Department is responsible.

I would refer the hon. Member to my answer to the hon. Member for Devizes (Mr. Charles Morrison) on 3rd February, in which I gave details of my visits to Ministry of Technology and Atomic Energy Authority Establishments. Information on the work done at these establishments is contained in the annual reports published by the Stationery Office of the Atomic Energy Authority and of the Ministry of Technology establishments.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that we have read this very small list of visits he has made, and will he tell the House whether he has taken any action as a result of what he has seen on these visits?

Hon. Members may have read the list, but what has happened is that I have been familiarising myself with the activities of the very comprehensive group of establishments I have covered in my visits. In order that I can make the best use of this information I have discussed it with the Advisory Council on Technology and the industries concerned, because the value of technology is that we should use it for making sure that what requires to be done shall be done by an economic method.

In particular, would my right hon. Friend say what are his plans, in view of the new prototype reactor established near Dounreay experimental station, for the purpose of bringing more power to Aberdeen—[Interruption.]

Order. The hon. and learned Gentleman must not wait so long for the applause and take a bow. We must move on.

I am at a disadvantage in not being able to see the bow, Mr. Speaker. But, of course, the object of the exercise we conducted in the House last week was first to agree on getting it built.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. You implied that the applause was actuated by me. It was quite spontaneous.

It may have been spontaneous, but we must move on.

asked the Minister of Technology what estimates he has made of the shortage of computing staff in Great Britain.

There are no precise figures, but there are currently shortages of most types of computer staff. The immediate pressures are for programmers and systems analysts with three or four years' experience. We are planning in conjunction with the Department of Education and Science to see that the educational system is geared to meet future requirements.

What immediate steps, other than the National Computer Centre—which seems rather a paper tiger—does the Minister intend to take to deal with this serious situation?

I must first make the point that the serious situation arises because there is an insufficiency of people with three or four years' experience. The blame for that can hardly be laid on this side of the House. Secondly, it would be regrettable for hon. Members opposite to start underplaying the value of the National Computing Centre before it has even had time to go into action. Thirdly, the Department of Education and Science has set up a group to deal exclusively with the whole, question of computer education.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the chairman of one very large British computer manufacturing organisation takes the view that the training of this highly qualified staff should be a joint venture with the other companies, including the large American company to which I think he referred a moment or two ago, and that directors of education should be better informed about the capacity of these firms?

We have in the Ministry a computer advisory group which is discussing this problem, not only with British computer companies but with American companies as well, because we all have an interest in getting as many of these people as possible.

But can the hon. Gentleman assure us that the existing computer staff is being used in the most economical way? In other words, can he assure us that the Government, the local authorities and the nationalised industries are not using these scarce scientific people and having their efforts duplicated over various authorities?

There is a great distance to go before we use either computers or people to the fullest extent here. If the right hon. Gentleman has any specific cases in mind, we will certainly be prepared to look at them.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress he has made in his consideration of longer-term developments in the application of modern tech nology to the railway industry.

I have nothing to add to the answer I gave the hon. Member on 8th February.

Does the Minister recall the statement by the Prime Minister on 26th November, 1964, when he was charged with stimulating advanced technology throughout the whole of industry? Does he recall a recent statement when he limited that to stimulating advanced technology into industries for which he has sponsorship? Can he explain to the House this important difference?

If the hon. Member is addressing a question to me of why the Prime Minister made a difference—if it is suggested he did so in the comments he made—that question might be addressed to the Prime Minister. There has never been any misunderstanding about the functions of the Minister of Technology. The Prime Minister has repeatedly said that departmental Ministers are not absolved from responsibility for productivity within the industries for which they accept sponsorship.

asked the Minister of Technology what is the total value of public sector purchases of Hovercraft at the most recent convenient date; and what is the estimated value of similar public sector purchases during the current year.

Up to 31st March, 1965, the total value of public sector Hovercraft purchases was in the region of £1·8 million. Expenditure for the current financial year is estimated to be small and limited to ancillary equipment for craft delivered in previous years.

In view of the recent naval trials of Hovercraft in Borneo, has the hon. Gentleman or his right hon. Friend had discussions with the Ministry of Defence about taking up Hovercraft for defence purposes?

Hovercraft are already being used for defence purposes. They have been bought by the Ministry of Aviation and the Ministry of Defence, and one would hope to see an increase in this. We are still evaluating the full range of possibilities of this particular craft.

asked the Minister of Technology what discussions he has had with overseas organisations developing the Hovertrain; and what consideration has been given to collaborating with such organisations.

Hovercraft Development Limited, a subsidiary company of the National Research Development Corporation, which is engaged on development work in connection with tracked Hovercraft, is keeping in close touch with developments overseas.

Would not the Parliamentary Secretary agree that all forms of public transport in this country are facing very serious problems and that there is a need for this country to follow the initiative of France in trying to promote a new form of public transport like this?

I think that the key is in the last half of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question. This is a new form of transport. There are many forms of modern tracked craft other than Hovercraft.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans he has for developing the manufacture of Hovercraft.

The development and manufacture of Hovercraft for civil use is primarily the responsibility of the industry, which will continue to have the co-operation of the National Research Development Corporation. Development for military use is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the Minister of Aviation.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary look into the possibility of producing this craft in Northern Ireland where some 4,000 skilled aircraft engineers are faced with unemployment over the next 12 months as a result of the Government's policies?

If there were any particular aviation company in Northern Ireland which the hon. Gentleman had in mind and if such a company was interested, it should contact the manufacturers or the Ministry of Aviation.

Could not the Navy be allowed to buy a few Hovercraft in place of aircraft carriers?

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that this is one of the most promising adventures in British industry? Is his Ministry assisting at any rate in experimenting with the existing Hovercraft to find what possible uses there are for it, because it is one of the great break-throughs by British industry and is exactly the sort of thing the Government should be backing?

It is a very great breakthrough for British industry. It is an outstanding example of the benefits of public intervention in this field. The Government are giving all the assistance they can to ensure that it is developed to the maximum degree.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress has been made with staffing the National Computing Centre; and how many people are now employed.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the hon. Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen) on 11th February.

Will the Minister say whether he is experiencing any difficulty in recruiting people whom he described on that occasion as "top level"? In view of the fact that his initial statement about setting up this new organisation was made nearly a year ago, is he satisfied with the progress which has been made?

It was not, of course, nearly a year ago. The answer to the first part of that supplementary question is that there is considerable difficulty in finding staff because staff is in short supply. We are not having particular difficulty at this place. The Director-designate is in possession and has been spending part of his time keeping up with the planning of the centre. There are no problems which are not natural when one sets up a new organisation.

asked the Minister of Technology what consideration has been given to establishing science-based industry in the Linwood area of Renfrew shire which could take advantage of the potentialities of the existing industrial complex there.

The proper distribution of industry is the responsibility of my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade.

Is my hon. Friend not not aware that at the Board of Trade there is a pretty large file on this in my name? Will he keep in mind that this industrial complex is unique in Scotland in that it can serve a large variety of industry, but it lacks a science-based industry? Since private industry has failed to establish this, is it not time that we asked the public sector to do it under his Department?

I do not think there is any question about the Government being fully alive to the need to have a completely balanced industrial base in the area which my hon. Friend represents, but this particular question of distribution of industry is the responsibility of another Ministry.

asked the Minister of Technology what is the purpose of his visit to Russia.

In order to have discussions on British and Soviet policies and methods for stimulating the use of advanced technology, and on the ways in which the country can best benefit from the technological exchange provisions of the existing Cultural Agreement with the Soviet Union.

Is the Minister aware that we on this side of the House welcome any technological visit to Russia? Can he say exactly what establishments he will visit, whom he hopes to meet, and if he will make a statement on his return?

I am not in a position to say exactly what establishments I shall be visiting. The primary purpose is to have discussions with those involved. As the hon. Member knows, there have been exchanges. Because the Russians have been over here more frequently than we have been there, it was thought desirable that I should go to have discussions.

While wishing the right hon. Gentleman every success in his visit, may I ask if he will bear in mind the tendency of the Russians to play their technological cards very close to their chests? Will he press upon them the need for reciprocity in giving information which is as valuable as that which they get from us?

I accept that the right hon. and learned Gentleman was genuinely saying that he welcomes the idea that I should go on this visit. We are conscious of the fact that the Russians tend to want to find out rather than to give information, but we hope that as a result of the visit we shall have a mutually satisfactory exchange of experts. This is the purpose of my visit.

asked the Minister of Technology when he expects to make a statement on the future of the computer industry.

Good progress is being made with the Government's measures for the British computer industry and to promote the use of computers in Britain. I see no need for a further statement at present.

Has the right hon. Gentleman received any report from the Maddock Committee on this?

Yes, but that is not the nature of the Question. If an hon. Member asks an entirely different supplementary question, it seems that he should put it down as the primary Question.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the results of his sponsorship of the electronics industry.

asked the Minister of Technology what are the results to date of his sponsorship of the telecommunications industry.

The principal function of my Department as sponsor for these industries is to establish and maintain close contact with them in all day-to-day and longer term matters. This is a continuing process ranging over all the activities of these industries. If the hon. Members have any specific matters in mind and will put down Questions, I will try to answer them in detail.

Is the Minister aware that there is widespread disappointment with the results he has so far achieved in this industry? Is he aware that these are centred, in particular, on the lack of frequency in contact with the industry and the quality of that contact when it comes? Can he explain to the House how on earth it came about that he allowed his right hon. Friend to let office equipment go without investment allowance under the new scheme?

The final part of that supplementary question is a separate question and needs to be put on the Order Paper. It is not a question for this Minister. To suggest that the industry is distressed at the nature of its contacts and the frequency of association is just not to understand what the industry is doing with us. Hon. Members opposite asked me in the first instance—because of the complicated nature of these two industries—not to rush into making statements of what we would do with them, but to study closely what is possible. Study contacts have been taking place into the possible use of metal oxydised semi-conductor transistorised equipment, which is an important aspect of equipment development. It cannot be said that in what we are doing we are not taking action.

In view of the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has assumed the sponsorship of these industries, can he say how we can assess the value of that sponsorship unless he gives further progress reports from time to time?

There is a little misunderstanding about what sponsorship is. Sponsorship means that industries which have problems can come to the Minister and get guidance to deal with them. I do not have to make a statement every time any of them comes to me. I apologise that this answer is slightly longer, but this is a technical and difficult problem which is bound to call for a long answer.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, whatever may happen to hon. Members opposite, the leaders of industry who sat with them on these committees before he became a Minister understand that he understands the job and is doing it very well indeed?

The right hon. Gentleman said that industries will come to him when they have problems. Can he tell the House if he has had such an approach made by the electronics industry about the Government's aircraft procurement policy, and what answers he gave?

They have not approached us about procurement policy in the detailed sense. They have done so in the broad sense. When one examines procurement policy it is not so easy to define what action should be taken over the whole range of industry.

asked the Minister of Technology to what extent it is his policy to keep the House of Commons informed about the expenditure of public money on research projects by the Atomic Energy Authority.

It is my policy, as has been the practice since the inception of the Atomic Energy Authority, to inform the House of its major civil research projects. Information about the Authority's research programmes are set out in its Annual Report, copies of which are laid before the House.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say what proportion of the projects are in matters not connected with the Atomic Energy Authority?

This is not listed, but if a detailed Question were put down on it I should try to answer it.

asked the Minister of Technology to what extent his sponsorship of the machine tool industry extends to British subsidiaries, fully owned or otherwise, of overseas principals; how many such subsidiary companies there are in this country; and what contacts he has with them.

The answer to the first part of the Question is completely; to the second, that my Department has been able to identify 22 companies engaged in machine tool production in which there are overseas interests; and to the third that I have met representatives of a number of these companies and have been in correspondence with others.

Could the Minister say if in allocating or giving advice on Government contracts he gives preference to British-designed goods manufactured by British companies, as opposed to American-designed products manufactured under licence in Britain?

To ask if one gives preferential advice and guidance is rather to suggest that one does not give the correct kind of advice to somebody if foreign capital is involved. We have discussed in the House on a previous occasion how one tries to determine what is foreign capital in view of the nature of the White Paper on investment policies carried out by major international companies. We would naturally prefer to support British firms, but this does not mean that we do not accept exclusions.

asked the Minister of Technology what increased financial support has been given or promised to the Machine Tool Industry Research Association since October, 1965.

None, Sir.

Does not that show that the machine tool industry is justified in feeling great disappointment at the misleading impression created by the Parliamentary Secretary last November that increased support would be forthcoming immediately?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman quite understood the Question. The M.T.I.R.A. can obtain grants from the Ministry at the rate of 75 per cent. of its grant-earning income from other sources, provided this reaches a minimum of £80,000 a year. The maximum grant from the Ministry has been increased from £80,000 to £120,000 a year. This is a sizeable increase, even on the hon. Gentleman's arithmetic.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans his Department has for stimulating the technology of underwater engineering projects.

The Atomic Energy Authority and the appropriate research stations in the Department are keeping in touch with the technological problems and possibilities.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that there are great developments going on in underwater technology and engineering which could be of the utmost benefit to the shipbuilding industry and engineering industries?

I certainly accept that. There are a number of other bodies as well as this Ministry involved in this matter. In addition to the Ministry's stations—the Ship Division of the N.P.L. and the Hydraulics Research Station at Wallingford—there are Government centres outside the Ministry with an interest in this technology, particularly the National Institute of Oceanography and the Admiralty.

asked the Minister of Technology what discussions he has had on the need for an extension of management education in the introduction of new techniques into British industry.

My right hon. Friend has had no formal discussions on this matter, but many of the activities of his Department are directed towards improving management efficiency and the introduction of new techniques.

In what sectors of industry has the Minister direct responsibility for management education?

The prime position of management education is that this will be mainly dealt with under the Industrial Training Act. There is an inter-departmental committee, of which I am chairman, covering the whole range of training, and recently the Central Training Council established under the Industrial Training Act issued a statement to the effect that it had set up a specific Committee to look at this one problem of management education, which the Government regard as very important.