asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on the National Board for Prices and Incomes' Report on the rates of mortgage interest chargeable by building societies.

I have not yet received the Board's Report.

May I first welcome the right hon. Gentleman, my old senior officer at the Oxford Union, in his new office? Is he aware that the Leader of the House told us that this Report would be available in the middle of October and that the building societies were induced to hold their hand until then? When will this Report be available?

It should be ready quite shortly.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he is satisfied with the degree today of voluntary observance of the pay freeze; and whether he will make a statement.

Yes, Sir. The bringing into force of Part IV of the Prices and Incomes Act is no reflection on the great majority of employers and employees who are voluntarily observing the standstill.

Is the right hon. Gentleman's satisfaction with this not marred at all by the fact that a great many people have been induced or cajoled into going back on bargains which they have freely made? What is he going to do to build up again faith in agreements freely negotiated?

The reasons for this step were explained and discussed in the House in July. I believe that the nation as a whole accepts its necessity, and that the problem of building up confidence which the right hon. Gentleman creates in his mind does not therefore exist.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that what many people on fixed incomes—especially pensioners—are more concerned about is whether prices are voluntarily being held down? Can he assure the House that he will apply the same vigour in keeping down prices—which I believe that he has rightly applied—in respect of incomes?

Yes, Sir. It is the Government's intention to see that the principles of the White Paper on the standstill are observed as much in respect of prices as of incomes. My hon. Friend will realise that people with lower incomes or with small fixed incomes would be among the worst sufferers if there were a free-for-all.

Does the First Secretary appreciate that the main factor in the increases in prices is the Selective Employment Tax and the burden of taxation that has been imposed by this Government? Does his answer, therefore, mean that he is going into reverse in this matter?

No, Sir. As explained in July, there were bound to be some increases in prices, for the reasons which the right hon. Gentleman has mentioned. It is true that since then those reasons have been the main reasons—indeed, almost the only reasons—why prices have risen. That follows necessarily. But I should have said that we shall carry out the principles enunciated in the White Paper.

Will my right hon. Friend acknowledge the fact that while there might be some justification in some places for an increase because of S.E.T., what is really happening is that people are using S.E.T. as an excuse to cheat the public? Will he consider introducing legislation to stop this form of downright cheating?

This fact has been brought to my attention and that of my colleagues in a number of letters and reports. These cases are being vigorously investigated. If it were necessary the powers under the Act would be used.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will set up a standing advisory committee to guide the Government in their economic planning.

No, Sir.

As the National Plan—which was launched about a year ago as a great advance in economic planning—has now really become a meaningless irrelevance, does not it show that the national planners have failed in their job? Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether we are to have another National Plan and, if so, when? Will it be done by the same group of people as produced the last one?

The hon. Member is wrong to say that the Plan is a meaningless irrelevance. It was said from the beginning, of course, that difficulties presented by the balance of payments could act as a constraint on what was planned. I accept that that difficulty is inherent in this country's economic situation, but that does not mean that the concept of planning ceases to be relevant and important. As to revision of the Plan, I want first to have consultations with the National Economic Development Council.

Since the Plan said that there would be 200,000 too few people labouring in this country and since there are now 400,000 too many, when will that part be revised?

The hon. and learned Gentleman is wrong to say that there are 400,000 too many. What we have to do at the moment is see that we do not get over-manning of certain industries. We must take the necessary measures to see that people are employed where their efforts will be most effective.

In view of the grave increase in unemployment in Wales, will the right hon. Gentleman consider creating machinery which will start economic planning in that country?

As I think the hon. Gentleman knows, there are special regional measures which are intended to have and are having an effect in helping regions which may be in particular difficulty.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will take steps to prohibit for 12 months all incremental awards of salaried staff in both the public and private sectors of the economy in respect of salaries at present exceeding £3,000; and if he will make a statement.

No, Sir.

Does not my right hon. Friend understand that permitting incremental increases when there is a wage freeze helps to cause resentment in people's minds, particularly those of lower workers? Will he reconsider his Answer?

No, I think not. The incremental increases which are permissible under the standstill are only those which were automatic and predetermined, that is to say, those which are really part of the method of payment of those workers.

Would not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is a ludicrous distinction to make between one category of workers, where the increase happens to be automatic, and another category which is on exactly the same sort of ladder but where there is more discretion for management on where the individual rungs should be? Does he not recognise that this is giving rise to great resentment in many industrial firms which pay their salaries by the later method?

If the increases are discretionary, it means that that is not the same sort of ladder. If a man enters an occupation with rates of increase clearly laid down in advance, that is part of his method of payment from the start.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in many professions, such as those of dentists, solicitors and architects, these increments are being paid to relatively highly paid workers, whereas in the same offices and the same surgeries people like clerical assistants and cleaners are being flatly refused them?

Yes, but if, as is suggested, we made automatic, predetermined increases of this kind subject to the standstill, it would be not only higher-paid workers who suffered but lower-paid workers as well. It has never been part of the standstill that we should discriminate between one kind of worker and another simply with relation to the size of income. The distinction here is between predetermined increases and those which are not predetermined.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on the progress of the Government's economic policies.

No, Sir.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree with the Economic Review, which suggests that the rise in output next year will be only fractional? Is not the root cause the Government's curbing of wages and any form of incentive? When will he do something to make it worth while to work harder?

The reason I said "No" to the hon. Gentleman's Question is that I do not believe that this subject, which would cover a very wide range of topics, could be properly or adequately dealt with by a statement and a few questions thereafter, without opportunity for debate. I trust, however, that the opportunity for examination of these matters will arise; I would welcome it.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Government's economic policies will not be effective as long as the widespread increases in profits and dividends continue to take place? Will he takes equivalent power of public super- vision and control over profits and dividends to that which he has already taken over wages and salaries?

There are powers, of course, over prices, which affect profits and dividends. Dividends themselves are a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Will the right hon. Gentleman accept our congratulations on the modesty of his first reply and understand that we all hope that that modesty will be communicated to his colleagues?

Will my right hon. Friend tell us whether there has been any revision by the Government since the statement of 20th July of the likely figure of unemployment both during the period of redeployment and after, particularly in view of the fact that it is this aspect of the matter which most gravely disturbs hon. Members on this side of the House?

To the question, has there been a revision?, I would say, no. This is a matter, of course, of concern to us all and will be debated in the House on Monday next.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what steps he is taking to ensure that the forthcoming removal of the import surcharge is passed on to the consumer in lower prices.

My right hon. Friend expects those concerned to recognise fully their responsibility in this respect.

Does my hon. Friend remember that, in November, 1964, many manufacturers increased their prices to consumers by amounts at least ample to cover the import surcharge? Can we have an assurance this afternoon that the Government will take the most rigorous action to ensure +hat those manufacturers will reduce their costs to consumers by amounts at least equivalent to the import surcharge?

I can give that assurance and there should be some scope for reductions. However, it is only fair to say that inquiries which we made early in 1965 showed that the majority of importers, wholesalers and retailers, had, in fact, absorbed the import surcharge, wholly or in part.

Would not the hon. Gentleman agree that a large number of importers reduced their prices, because of the import surcharge coming down in November, when it was announced by the Chancellor last July, as otherwise they would not have sold their goods?

Some reductions might have taken place, but there is scope for many more.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will refer the latest increases in postal charges to the National Board for Prices and Incomes.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs why an exception was made to allow the recent increases in postal charges.

No, Sir. The increases in postal charges were an integral part of the measures necessary to remedy the economic situation announced by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 20th July.

Does not that reply suggest that the Government are not only tyrannical but capricious? Is not the Government's prices and incomes policy in fact just a policy of higher prices and smaller incomes?

The position was set out very clearly indeed, as my right hon. Friend the First Secretary said, in the White Paper three months ago. There has been no change since then.

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that this looks to the country as if there is one law for Government industries and another for private industries? Would he not further agree that the increased Post Office charges are an integral part of all costs in every industry and that private industry is now supposed to absorb these costs itself?

We made it clear at every stage that, whether the prices are in the public or private sector, every effort should be made by those concerned to absorb them.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what was the cost to his Department and to other Government Departments of preparing the National Plan, exclusive of printing costs.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what was the cost of preparing the National Plan.

It is not possible to give any useful figure.

It not this a further indication of how wrong the National Plan was? Does the First Secretary realise what this cost industry—industry which took them seriously for a few weeks? Would he realise, before bringing out another Plan, that they may not be believed to the same degree again?

The publication of the National Plan was always more popular in industry among those it concerned than among hon. Members opposite. There is still a great deal to be done on the check list for action of the Plan which alone would make it very worth while.

Would not the Government do well to recognise that their National Plan is now as dead as the dodo?

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on his official talks with the Scottish Trade Union Congress on Friday, 30th September, on the subject of the employment and industrial position in Scotland.

My colleagues and I met with representatives of the Scottish Trades Union Congress to discuss the economic prospects in Scotland, particularly in the light of the Government's economic measures announced in July. The Scottish Trades Union Congress expressed their concern at redundancies in Scotland and sought reassurances that Ministers would keep watch on the unemployment situation to ensure that the claims of Scotland were not prejudiced. That assurance I gave them.

On the question of assurances, am I right in supposing that the S.T.U.C. received one assurance that the Government would intensify their policy on the question of issuing industrial development certificates? If that is right, can the Minister give evidence that this is being done?

I explained that it was the intention to administer the policy of industrial development certificates in a way that would help both Scotland and other regions that might otherwise be prejudiced by the present situation. That is being done and will continue.

In view of these talks and the developments since, will the Minister advise his Cabinet colleagues to stop making speeches saying that Scotland is exempt from the freeze and that houses and schools are not affected by it when it is blatantly obvious to us in Scotland that this is not the case?

It is the case that houses and schools are not affected. It is not claimed that Scotland—like the rest of the country—does not face difficulties. What is claimed is that there are measures carried out which help Scotland and other regions which might be specially injured.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will indicate the procedure whereby the prices standstill is to be enforced.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether it is the Government's intention to take action against those companies who have raised their prices during the wages and incomes standstill.

As my hon. Friend will be aware, we have taken powers under Part IV of the Prices and Incomes Act, now in force, which can be used to reinforce the voluntary basis of the standstill.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Government's attempts to hold the prices standstill so far have proved utterly inadequate? Will he not give the House an assurance that the Government will forthwith establish a central prices control agency to regulate essential prices?

In the first place, although I share my hon. Friend's concern on the question of prices, as I am sure we all do, I would not agree that the voluntary standstill has not achieved a very large measure of success. As I said, the great majority of those concerned are co-operating with it, and we have the reserve powers within the Act. I think that these are adequate for our purpose.

Despite that Answer, will the Minister agree that there is widespread concern among people in the Labour movement over the large price increases that have taken place? Does he agree that if no action is taken on prices, but only on wages, the whole freeze will be discredited?

May I make it quite clear that there is nothing at all between us on the importance of working on prices, but I think that we have achieved a large measure of success, and if a full explanation is given in the light of the standstill White Paper, many people will appreciate what has already been done.

Would the Minister answer a simple but very important question: does he really believe that under a mixed and competitive economy it is either possible or desirable to enforce a prices standstill?

In a society where there is a large degree of public responsibility, there are very many people who are prepared to co-operate with the Government when the Government make it clear that their policies are in the national interest.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the big erosion of the income of the lower income groups by price increases? Would he inform the House quite clearly and definitely which commodities, where price increases have taken place, he is having examined? Will he pay particular attention to the price increases in respect of laundries and biscuits?

We are examining a very large range of commodities and services. But as my hon. Friend will agree, the whole purpose of the prices and incomes policy is to help, among others, those who, because of their fixed incomes, have suffered most in the past from rising prices.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will now make a statement regarding publication of the Northern, Yorkshire and Humber-side, and East Midlands Regional Studies.

The Stationery Office is publishing the Northern Region's Study on Monday, 24th October. Those for the Yorkshire and Humberside, and East Midlands Regions will be published on 14th November and in early December respectively.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this statement will be welcomed, particularly in the North? Can he indicate to what extent these publications are Government documents reflecting Government policies and intentions?

These documents will not be statements of Government policy and for that reason will not commit the Government, but they will provide a basis for discussion on regional planning questions and will in this way lead to the formulation of policies.

asked the First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (1) whether he will clarify in greater detail the concept of severe restraint following the period of the wages standstill; and if he will make a statement;

My hon. Friend will be aware that I am at present holding consultations with the Trades Union Congress and Confederation of British Industry on the criteria for prices and incomes determination and arrangements for continuing mutual discussions during the period of severe restraint. Good progress is being made and a White Paper will be published when consultations are completed. Further consultations will be held in due course with the object of securing a planned growth of money incomes in line with real output after the period of severe restraint comes to an end.

Could my right hon. Friend give the House an assurance that there will be no question of a continuation of compulsion as far as collective bargaining is concerned? Will he give us an assurance that at the earliest possible moment there will be a return to free collective bargaining, that this in no way means the ending of an incomes policy, but that he will adopt the views of the Trades Union Congress and allow them to set up machinery through the trade union organisation?

In the first place, I should like to repeat what I said recently in a public speech and which was recorded in the Press. The life of the compulsory powers under Part IV of the Prices and Incomes Act is in any case limited by Statute and there would be no question of renewing or prolonging them. Next, I agree with my hon. Friend that the end of that exceptional period does not mean the end of an incomes policy. It is certainly desirable that the trade union movement should have its own machinery for considering wage claims. Exactly how trade unions, Government and employers work together on this is something which we are still working out.

Will the Minister give an assurance that during the period referred to in the Question he will not seek to override, or to obtain the authority of the House to override, the arbitration provisions written into the Act by which teachers' salaries are negotiated?

I do not think that I shall make—without any prejudice whatever to what is contained in that question—any pronouncements at all at this stage about the operation of criteria during the period of severe restraint until I have concluded these consultations.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that while it may be necessary, to overcome an economic crisis, to make provision that contracts freely entered into shall not be enforceable—and I think that the Government were right to do this—it is desirable that that state of affairs should cease as soon as possible? Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that in the period referred to in the Question the Government will give careful reflection to that matter?

I can give my hon. and learned Friend the assurance for which he asks, carefully worded as it was. On the earlier question, we do not underestimate the seriousness of what has been done about contracts, but I believe that the nation as a whole understood the Tightness of this at the time.

Will the First Secretary wipe out in the period of wage restraint the great unfairness by which civil servants and local government officials will get their annual incremental increases whereas the staff of private enterprise are not allowed to have theirs?

I answered a Question about that a little while ago. I will not at this stage prejudge the criteria for the period of severe restraint. That is exactly what I am engaged on discussions about at the present time.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of his decision to raise the limit on the export of works of art, what steps he intends taking to safeguard all the items in the Drake Collection.

I do not think that the recent raising of the limit calls for any special steps. The normal procedures still apply to the export of antiques.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this subject is causing great concern in Plymouth, that certain parts of the Drake Collection fall in this category and that there is considerable anxiety that they may go to America?

No applications have so far been received in respect of any of the items in the Drake Collection. The reviewing body will, of course, take note of any applications that may come in, but I do not believe that at the moment there is any need to be alarmed about the situation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on his recent official visit to Australia.

Yes, Sir. I visited Australia between 18th and 30th September, including in my tour Canberra and the six State capitals. I should like to express my thanks to the Australian Government for their warm hospitality.

While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that Answer, may I ask him when he intends to approach the Australian Government with a view to getting the Anglo-Australian Trade Agreement renewed on a long-term basis instead of the present year-to-year basis?

There is an agreement between ourselves and the Australian Government that it would be wiser to complete the Kennedy Round negotiations before we revise the Anglo-Australian Trade Agreement. Meanwhile, it remains in force.

Does the President of the Board of Trade realise that Australia is developing very fast indeed and is in urgent need of capital for that purpose? As trade will follow the investment of capital, will the right hon. Gentleman use his influence on the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see that Great Britain and not the United States supplies that capital?

I entirely agree. Australia is a very great market for British exports of that kind and I have been impressing that on British industry since returning home.

For the benefit of those who were not there, would the right hon. Gentleman repeat what he said in Australia about gold?

I have already made a statement about this matter and J am sure that the hon. Gentleman fully understands it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to waive the customs duty on improved artificial heart valves being imported from the United States of America as free replacements for a less up-to-date type of valve.

These replacements have presented us with a problem because we have no powers to waive duty on them, but I am considering whether there are grounds for suspending the duty on all imports of artificial heart valves. I hope to make an announcement shortly.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he is taking to promote development of male-employing factories in central Scotland.

I am prepared to use to the full my powers under the Local Employment Acts to assist the development of male-employing projects in central Scotland. The report published yesterday of my Department's actions under that legislation shows that in the year to 31st March, 1966, assistance totalling £14,120,000 was offered in Glasgow and the central belt of Scotland. Much of the benefit of this has yet to mature.

In view of Mr. George Harriman's statement to the effect that it is unlikely that the redundant men will be taken on again at B.M.C. during the next 12 months, can something more be done?

As I am sure my hon. Friend knows, the redundancies at the B.M.C. factory at Bathgate are, happily, comparatively small and many other industrial expansions are going on, including advanced factories, in central Scotland.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the total value of capital investment in plant and machinery in manufacturing industry during the first nine months of this year: and what percentage increase or decrease this represents on 1965.

In the first half of 1966 this investment was £472 million at current prices, and was in volume 3 per cent. higher than the average level in 1965. Figures for the third quarter are not yet available.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that, from the point of view of productivity, capital investment is of far greater importance than the redeployment of labour?

Yes, Sir, and I am happy to say that private capital investment is still running at a high level, though slightly lower than some months earlier. Fortunately, public investment is still rising substantially.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the estimates made by the Board of Trade indicate that next year industrial investment will fall by between 7 per cent. and 8 per cent.? Is not this a grave reflection on the Government's policies and does it not go far to stultify the modernisation of industry?

The forecast—and it is only a forecast—reduction is quite small and, fortunately, the increase in public investment greatly exceeds this. Of course, this rate of public investment would never have occurred if hon. Gentlemen opposite had had their way.

Would the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the figures which I gave for manufacturing industry, with which the Question is concerned, are correct?

I am not sure exactly what the right hon. Gentleman said [HON. MEMBERS: "Answer."] It is perfectly clear that the current forecast is for some slight reduction, but this will be offset, on present figures, by the increase in public investment. However, I fully agree that we must watch the figures carefully and that it is essential to maintain the level of private as well as public investment.

In view of the serious evidence of turn-down of capital investment in the future, which could have disastrous consequences, would my right hon. Friend consider having discussions with the Chancellor of the Exchequer with a view to bringing forward the date of payment of the cash grants, making them payable now instead of people having to wait such a long time?

I advise my hon. Friend not to exaggerate this tendency, which is at present quite moderate. We will watch carefully how it goes before taking further decisions of policy, but, if necessary, we will take them.

Is it not a fact that the projections in the National Plan took as one of their principal assumptions the figure of an increase of 7 per cent. for each year in private manufacturing investment? In view of that, is it not clear that the Government should look at their whole policy for private investment—that is, unless the National Plan is to be more of a dead letter than it is already?

Of course, these tendencies should be constantly reviewed, but as I said in my statement, for the first half of this year private investment was higher than last year.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science why he did not take the advice of the Gallery directors on the Advisory Committee on the Export of Works of Art when they opposed the proposal to raise the limit of control to £2,000 on the grounds that this increased the chances of items of artistic or historical interest leaving the country.

The reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art unanimously recommended this change, which was accepted in July. Allowing for the rapid inflation in value of works of art in recent years, the new value limit is still lower than the original recommendation of the Waverley Committee in 1952. May I add that no advice to the contrary was submitted to me by gallery directors.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Will she consider keeping the limit low, lower than it is now, and not allowing it to rise persistently as it has in the last few years?

I assure my hon. Friend that I am keenly concerned to give every encouragement to the regional galleries, and perhaps we could have a talk about it as soon as the report of the Reviewing Committee is out next month.

How does the right hon. Lady hope to stop the export of national treasures which have no monetary value?

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science what is his policy in regard to the appointment of known members of the Communist Party to headships in schools for which his Department is responsible.

The appointment of head-teachers to maintained schools is in local hands and is not the responsibility of the Department. In my right hon. Friend's view a teacher's membership of a political party should not, of itself, affect the choice of the appointing body.

Is the Minister aware that there was much public criticism and opposition to one such appointment recently in the London Borough of Brent and that this is not a question of witch hunting? Is he not aware that there are very many parents who art anxious about the possibility of their children coming under the influence of active Communist Party workers?

Our view is that the political opinions of teachers are their own private concern, so long as they do nothing which makes them professionally unacceptable; for example, if they were to use their position to propagate their political views in the schools. I am advised that the Brent local education authority followed these principles when making its recent appointment.

Would my hon. Friend assure the House that teachers who are members of the Tory Party will not be debarred from becoming headmasters?

The general principle which I have enunciated is applicable whatever be the political opinions of the teachers concerned.

While not necessarily disagreeing with the Minister's original Answer, may I ask whether he would not agree that when a local authority turns down an application for a job at a school or college of education on non-educational grounds, it is highly desirable that this should not be done in terms which are prejudicial to the appointment of that applicant elsewhere?

If I understand the right hon. Gentleman correctly, he is referring to another case, in Derbyshire, about which the hon. Member for Chigwell (Mr. Biggs-Davison) has written to my right hon. Friend. My right hon. Friend is making inquiries of the Derbyshire education authority, and he will write to the hon. Member as soon as he has obtained the authority's reply.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department when the revised code for petrol filling stations, with particular reference to the use of the latched cut-off petrol nozzle, will be circulated for the guidance of licensing authorities.

The technical sub-committee which I mentioned during the Adjournment debate on 29th July has considered as a matter of priority the use of latched automatic cut-off nozzles, and has this week agreed on the recommendations it wishes to make to the Standing Advisory Committee on Dangerous Substances. The Advisory Committee will be asked to consider them as soon as possible, and, when its views have been received, my right hon. Friend will decide what guidance can be given to licensing authorities.

I thank the right hon. Lady for that reply. Would she ask the Standing Advisory Committee to hurry up with its decision, as the garage trade wants it as a matter of urgency to offset some of the very heavy costs imposed on it by the Selective Employment Tax?

Yes, Sir. We are treating this as a matter of urgency, and seeing to it that the Advisory Committee considers the matter as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department what is the present strength of the police Fraud Squad; and what plans he has for its expansion.

The present strength of the Fraud Squad is 83, against an establishment of 84. No increase is contemplated at present.

In view of the growing evidence that, despite several newspapers risking libel actions, large-scale frauds can go uninvestigated until they cause considerable damage, will my hon. and learned Friend consider co-opting civilian chartered accountants to assist the police?

It is certainly true that the Fraud Squad is heavily engaged, but its establishment was reviewed within the last two years, when it was increased by 20. As my Answer indicated, the Fraud Squad is approximately up to establishment and we do not intend to increase it. I think that the Squad can cope with the difficulties.

Turning to the substance of the supplementary question, will the Under-Secretary confirm or deny that there are no qualified accountants at present operating in the Fraud Squad as an integral part of its establishment?

That is a point I shall look at. The Fraud Squad certainly uses expert knowledge, but I will take account of the supplementary questions asked by the right hon. and learned Gentleman and by my hon. Friend.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will take steps to enable the Metropolitan Police force to remove derelict cars in the Willesden area without the long delays which arise at present.

The police remove vehicles which are causing a traffic obstruction. Otherwise it is for the local authority to remove and dispose of abandoned derelict vehicles. I am assured that, in the Willesden area, the police give all the help they can.

Will my hon. and learned Friend accept the gratitude of the people of Willesden for what the police already do? Will he look further at the possibility of enabling the police to do the job more efficiently, not only by means of the Measure now going through the House but by giving instructions which will enable them to move with more speed?

The Bill that is being promoted by the right hon. Member for Streatham (Mr. Sandys) would certainly improve the position if it were passed in the form that is now proposed. Further discussions are taking place with the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Housing and Local Government to make the procedures swifter and more effective.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in what circumstances he is now authorising the arming of the police, uniformed and in plain clothes; and what consideration he has given to a general extension of the present authority.

Arms are available for issue to police officers who are on protection duty or need to carry them for self-defence when engaged on specially dangerous duty, and who have been trained to handle them. I do not contemplate any substantial change in these arrangements, but I am considering, in consultation with the organisations representing the various ranks in the police service, a number of detailed improvements, for example, in firearm training.

While recognising that any general arming of the police would be a retrograde step, is it not possible that the third policeman would be alive today if there had been a gun in the car? Consequently, is there not a case for being a little more generous in allowing those on special and dangerous duties to have guns with them?

It is very dangerous to draw hypothetical deductions such as the hon. Gentleman has drawn. I am certainly prepared to look at matters' of detail in this respect, as I have indicated, but my mind—and I think that all ranks in the police force are in agreement—is very strongly against moving towards any general policy of arming the police.