asked the President of the Board of Trade what new steps are being taken to ensure that tankers do not discharge oil into British coastal waters and rivers.

The oil industry recently set up a study group to make recommendations for a standard code of safe practices at oil terminals, including precautions against spillages. In addition the Board of Trade has intensified its efforts to prevent oil pollution.

Will the hon. Gentleman note that, desirable as these steps are, the best way of stopping this nuisance would be to impose very heavy fines on any foreign or British vessels that discharge oil in the vicinity of the British coast or in British waters?

Yes. In some cases, £1,000 fines are imposed. The hon. Member would like to know that the harbour and conservancy authorities have powers and last year successfully prosecuted 45 offenders.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what steps are being taken to get other countries to sign and implement the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil?

Thirty-one countries already adhere to the International Convention. There is growing international awareness of this problem, and there is very keen national awareness by the Government, too.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what inquiries have been instigated to establish responsibility for the discharge of oil into the River Medway on 18th September last.

Criminal proceedings have been instituted by the Medway Conservancy Board.

It would obviously be wrong to comment on that, but will the hon. Gentleman look into the possibility of a double check to ensure that all the seacocks, etc., on ships are closed before they discharge oil? It seems that there might be the appearance that they are closed whereas, in fact, they are not, and about 1,600 tons of fuel were pumped into the Medway before the failure was discovered.

Yes, but it is difficult to legislate against human frailty. This was the case when the "Seestern" discharged oil in the Medway. I take note, however, of what the hon. Member has said. We are stepping up surveillance measures.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that large export orders are being lost by Scottish firms because of the shortages of skilled labour; to what extent this experience is widespread throughout the United Kingdom; and what steps he intends to take to remedy the situation.

I am aware that production in some firms both in Scotland and elsewhere is limited by shortage of skilled labour and that this may affect exports. The Government's measures to increase training and retraining and to help exporting firms which are short of manpower were explained by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour in the economic debate on 30th November.

Has my right hon. Friend had any discussions with the firm of Ferranti in Scotland in view of the recent statement by the chairman that a £3 million order had been lost because of the shortage of skilled labour? Will my right hon. Friend take steps to provide the House with much more information than we have had hitherto as to the extent of this problem?

I have not had direct conversations because training is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour. If, however, Ferranti's are in need of factory space or land, I should be very glad to see what I can do for them.

To what extent does the President of the Board of Trade take into account the supply of skilled labour, as opposed to the unemployment figures as a whole, when deciding on the granting of industrial development certificates?

Most certainly we take that into account as one of the relevant factors. But we are, of course, extremely anxious to increase the supply of skilled labour by training and all other possible measures.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many inquiries were received from industrialists for factory space in Wales in the years 1955 to 1965; how many factories were established as a result; how many men and women they employ; and what are the figures for 1964–65 and 1965–66.

No record is available of inquiries from 1955 to 1965. In that period at least 119 firms not previously operating in Wales are known to have established there and, at the last available date, employed some 20,400 people, of whom about three-fifths were men.

In each of the years, ending October, 1965, and October, 1966, 19 firms were established in Wales and they so far employ 4,500, over half men.

I thank the President of the Board of Trade for his reply, but does he wonder that, with a little more than 7,000 vacancies and nearly 40,000 unemployed people in Wales, despite the heavy loss by migration, the people of Wales increasingly regard government from London as a failure, whichever party is in power?

I think the hon. Gentleman makes a mistake, though I am sure that the people of Wales do not, in forgetting that most of the expansions in employment are the result of extensions of existing firms and not of the arrival of new firms in the area.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what evidence is available of the extent of the increase in imports with the ending of the surcharge.

None, as yet.

Has the right hon. Gentleman formed no estimate? Judging from the experience of what happened to trade imports when the surcharge was reduced in May and June of last year, is it not to be anticipated that something of this kind will happen—without in any way deprecating the removal of the surcharge?

So far, we have had only seven days and any estimate, therefore, would not be more than a guess. It is perfectly clear that we must expect an increase in imports in the first two months after the abandonment of the surcharge. However, that will be an exceptional increase, and I hope that no one will be misled by it.

Why did the President of the Board of Trade announce six months in advance that he intended to abolish the surcharge? Was it not an extraordinary thing to do? The crisis has happened in the middle. Should it not be continued for another few months while the country is in economic difficulties?

No, Sir. I do not think so. Overseas countries and business men in many industries here and abroad had a right to know a reasonable time beforehand what the position would be.

In view of the danger of increasing imports when we reflate again, would the President of the Board of Trade consider the use of the financial method of restricting imports by the prime deposit system as a temporary means of dealing with the problem?

We have considered that, but it would be much better to achieve a balance by increasing exports, as we are now doing, than by restricting imports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what provision he intends to make, in view of the impending transfer of the Patent Office to a new site in Croydon, for the holding of hearings at some convenient place near the Law Courts in the Strand.

None, Sir. Croydon is readily accessible from central London.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that that is a very disappointing reply? In view of the appalling inconvenience of not having any hearings in central London, and the manifest inefficiency of having the Patent Office divided among four separate buildings in Croydon, would he not undertake to reconsider this very short-sighted proposal?

We have gone very carefully into the pros and cons of convenience and efficiency in this proposed move. We are convinced that to separate the hearings from the Patent Office would be uneconomic and inefficient, even if suitable accommodation could be found near the Law Courts.

Is this not an office where it really is essential to have all the departments under one roof and not divided, as my hon. Friend the Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Patrick Jenkin) has mentioned?

I understand that the buildings concerned will be joined together with appropriate covered ways. They are not entirely separate.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Croydon is very near central London and that many people in Croydon will be very pleased to have the Patent Office moved there?

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give an up-to-date estimate of the percentage decline in industrial investment, excluding investment in mineral oil refining, in 1967 compared with 1966.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proposals he has for revising the expectations of future levels of industrial investment; and if he will make a statement.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what revision he now proposes to make in his estimate of 7 per cent. to 8 per cent. fall in capital investment next year, in view of the industrial production index fall from 138 to 133.

With permission, I will answer Questions No. 9 and No. 27, and Question No. 6 for Written Answer together.

At the end of September, manufacturers' plans suggested a fall between 1966 and 1967 of 11 per cent., if investment by mineral oil refiners is excluded, and 7 per cent. or 8 per cent., if oil refining is included. I would not wish to amend this estimate because of short term fluctuations in the index of production. In January, a new estimate will be made from forecasts currently being collected.

Whatever the shortcomings of the form of estimating, does the President of the Board of Trade not regard this as a very disturbing trend, on any view? Does he not recognise that the only really effective incentive to industrialists to invest is that they should see a prospect of making a profit thereby? Can he not recognise that there will be no prospect of getting investment until Government policy is changed?

These estimates were made before the increases in investment grants which I announced last week. The hon. Gentleman constantly overlooks that, at the same time, as this temporary fall in private investment occurs, public investment will increase substantially next year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind, that the bulk of our exports come from the private sector and that increases in the nationalised industries' investment will not necessarily compensate in that respect. Would he comment on this? Surely the prospective decline of 11 per cent. is calamitous compared with the prospective increases which were contained within the National Plan? Would he bear in mind the desirability of a cut in the rate of company taxation as a means of restoring business confidence?

It is precisely for that reason that we have confined the investment grant to the manufacturing sector, which is by far our biggest exporting section of the economy, and confined it to private and not public enterprise.

Regarding the Question which I had down for Written Answer, where the Government have shown that the industrial production index has fallen from 138 to 133, does the President of the Board of Trade really think that private industrialists will go in for greater expansion with figures like that in front of them? What can he do to help this other figure?

There are many factors which influence private investment. I agree with the hon. Gentleman that the prospect of a market is one important factor. But the immediate influence which we can bring to bear is the help by means of the investment grants.

What effect will this very great decline in industrial investment have upon the forecasts in the National Plan?

It is not a very great decline. Private investment, which was running at a high level this year, has temporarily declined by a small amount, which I agree with the right hon. Gentleman is unfortunate. We hope that that will be reversed as a result of the action which we have taken. In any case, it is offset by the increase in public investment.

I asked the right hon. Gentleman what effect it would have on the National Plan forecasts.

That is another question.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. Is it not an innovation, and, at first sight, not necessarily for the better, for a Question down for Written Answer to be included in the oral replies?

I did not get the hon. Gentleman's question.

Is it an innovation which has been approved by the procedure of the House for a Written Question to be answered orally on the Floor of the House?

It is not an innovation. It has happened before.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give the total amount of tobacco leaf import into the United Kingdom since 1st January from all sources other than from Rhodesia.

Imports of unmanufactured tobacco from all sources other than Rhodesia were 184 million 1bs. in the first 10 months of this year.

May I ask the hon. Gentleman if those figures show that the United States have sent to us tobacco to the value of some £20 to £30 million in the last 12 months and, at the same time imposed an additional burden on our own dollar account? Does that not raise moral aspects in regard to sanctions with United States support?

Imports of tobacco from the United States raise an entirely different question from the one on the Order Paper.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that there is concern in Lancashire at the increase in imports of cotton cloth from Portugal in the first nine months of this year; and why the global quota restrictions on cotton textiles are not applicable to Portugal.

The global quota restrictions do not apply to our E.F.T.A. partners. But I have very much in mind, and the Portuguese authorities are aware of this, that it would be unfair to the restricted countries if others derived undue benefit from their restraint.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that reply, may I ask whether he is aware that, although both sides of industry have been quite pleased with the efforts that the Government have made to give them some measure of protection which was lacking for so long during the period of rule by the party opposite, this represents a serious loophole which we hope will be closed very soon?

As I think my hon. friend knows, I have discussed this with the Portuguese Minister of Trade. The Portuguese Government are very well aware of our point of view.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that in Lancashire the textile industry has suffered more than most? Can he tell us when he expects to be able to fulfil the pledge to set up an Imports Commission?

It is precisely because Lancashire has suffered that we have agreed and introduced this exceptional form of protection. I would refer my hon. Friend to the Order on the Textile Council which we shall be moving in this House next week.

May I ask whether this is not likely to be the general trend because, if we were to push out industries which are non-competitive in the E.F.T.A. countries and move the employees into other industries in which we can export to these countries, how can we deny the exports of the E.F.T.A. countries to this country?

I am constantly reminding the Portuguese Government that they have special obligations to our exports, as we have to theirs.

Did I understand the right hon. Gentleman to say in answer to one of his hon. Friends that an Imports Commission is to be set up in accord-once with the promise made by the party opposite?

No, Sir. I said that in the coming week we would bring in an Order for the extension of the Cotton Board on to a much wider basis.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many square feet of advance factory space were unused at the last available date in the Bathgate area.

Forty thousand sq. ft. built by West Lothian County Council.

While cash grants and off-the-job adult retraining are excellent and relevant measures for the Bathgate area, where the situation has been greatly brightened by important orders from Finland, nevertheless, for these 40,000 sq. ft., cannot my right hon. Friend encourage import substitute industries?

Those six factories are on the Board of Trade's list and are drawn to the attention of industialists who are seeking factories in development areas.

With regard to import saving projects, I think that my hon. Friend will be aware that the appropriate economic development committees are considering projects on these lines, and we shall of course let them know about factories which may be available for this purpose.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the removal of the import surcharge on 30th November and the consequent danger of an increase in imports, what further steps are being taken to persuade private and public concerns to purchase British made items during the present economic difficulties.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Answer given by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister to the hon. Member for Chigwell (Mr. Biggs-Davison) on 25th October.—[Vol. 734, c. 823–4.]

Is it not a fact that a number of large concerns, both in the public and in the private sector, tend to buy imported goods without even bothering to find out whether there are any British made substitutes? Can the Board of Trade be rather more dynamic in dealing with this problem?

I do not think that the practice to which my hon. Friend refers is very general, but I hope that where price and quality are reasonably equal all British consumers will prefer British goods.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, even with the import surcharge, during last year just on £4 million sterling was spent on importing one-armed bandits, juke boxes, and so on? Surely, if these things are necessary, as they can be made here people ought to be told not to import them, and my right hon. Friend should take some action to try to prevent it?

I cannot confirm my hon. Friend's exact figure without notice, but we have to remember that we, too, are exporters of quite a number of rather inessential goods.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that the Daily Express "Buy British" campaign is a laudable one, or does he subscribe to the view expressed by the Prime Minister that the Daily Express is an irresponsible newspaper?

I think that it is a laudable campaign. I said so in the Daily Express when it was published, and so did the Prime Minister shortly afterwards, also publicly.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now make a statement on the future of the Cotton Board.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if the review of the future of the Cotton Board has been completed; and if he will make a statement.

An Order has now been laid before the House embodying the recommendations made to me by a working group of employers and trade unionists which conducted the review of the Cotton Board. The Order will shortly be debated; but I should like now to express my appreciation of the thorough and con- structive work which the working group has done.

Why does the right hon. Gentleman not include all textiles under this new body? Why did he exclude wool?

We wished to include all textiles, and we included all those which were willing to be included. I am sure that the hon. and learned Gentleman would not wish us to exercise compulsion on private enterprise in this respect.

During the period before the Order becomes effective, will the right hon. Gentleman keep in touch with the Cotton Board regarding the widespread closure of textile units which is now taking place in Lancashire, and keep under review the desirability of extending the districts of Lancashire available for development area assistance?

Yes, Sir. Certainly we are always in touch with the Cotton Board on all these matters.

With regard to the Order to be brought in next week about the revised Cotton Board, will my right hon. Friend say whether there is any power included within the Cotton Board to deal with rationalisation schemes, and/or import quotas, or a similar high standing committee, and if not, why not?

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Order which is shortly to be debated, but in drafting this scheme we have followed the views of both management and trade unions in the cotton and textile industries.

Will the right hon. Gentleman ask the Cotton Board to investigate why it is that Lancashire producers of yarn charge about 10d. a 1b. more for their yarn that we can buy it from the Continent?

That is another question, but I shall certainly look into it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will take steps to encourage the expansion of overseas market research and sales staff in British industry.

The Government are actively encouraging the expansion of British industries' overseas sales activities, including collective market research. The B.N.E.C. Collective Overseas Market Research Scheme provides for the Government to contribute up to one half of the basic overseas cost.

But if the Government are so anxious, surely they should encourage private industry to look after these matters for itself, and surely the best way of doing that is for the President of the Board of Trade to encourage his right hon. Friend to alter the categories of these staff for S.E.T. purposes so that there is a rebate rather than a repayment?

We have been asked to do more than simply encourage industry to do this for itself, and after a good deal of discussion we have introduced this scheme which applies through the British National Export Council. I think that both are necessary.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to introduce legislation to amend the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1956.

There is no provision for this in the programme for the present Session.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman feel that this is a question of priorities, and does he therefore agree that it is more important to nationalise steel than to make industry competitive?

There is a limit to the amount of legislation which can be carried through in one Session. I think that the Companies Bill was a priority for this, considering that we had the Monopolies and Mergers Act in the last Session, but the more expeditiously the Opposition conduct the Steel Bill debate, the more Bills we can introduce.

Before the right hon. Gentleman considers any amendment of this Act, will he bear in mind that Government agencies are not even obeying the, Act as it is at present? If he wants evidence of that fact, will he look at my Question No. 71 today?

I shall certainly look at that Question with pleasure.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, even as the legislation stands, it is impossible to get cut-price pop records, and that they carry a message in the centre to the effect that they are not to be sold below the list price?

I was not aware of that until this moment, but I take note of what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give a general direction to the National Film Finance Corporation not to finance films which defame the Army.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give a general directive to the National Film Finance Corporation to refrain from financing films which denigrate the United Kingdom and smear the members of the Armed Forces.

I do not consider that such a direction is either necessary or desirable.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Corporation has recently financed a film called "The Private Right" which contains a scene showing a British soldier presiding over the infliction of degrading tortures on a prisoner? This scene is highly offensive to those serving, and to all who have served in the Army. If people want to produce films of this kind, with episodes of this sort, should not they finance them with their own money, and not the taxpayers'?

That may be the right hon. Gentleman's opinion about this film, and I do not dissent from it because I have not seen it, but I do not think that it is part of my job to exercise any sort of censorship.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman aware of the very full report which appeared in The Times of 16th November about this film, and should not public bodies refuse to use public money to defame members of Her Majesty's Forces? Will the right hon. Gentleman condemn such a practice, and make certain that no further public money is used to finance the other two proposed films of this trilogy?

I recognise the strong feelings on the subject, but I doubt whether it would be practical for the National Film Finance Corporation to investigate every detail of a film before it was made.

If we are able to defame Alice in Wonderland, why cannot we defame the Army?

Will the right hon. Gentleman be a bit forthcoming on this subject and say that he will encourage the N.F.F.C. to sponsor the much greater use of film material showing the valuable peace-keeping work done by British forces overseas.

I am not convinced that it is my duty to go into this amount of detail, but I am sure that the Corporation and the producers of these films will take note of what has been said in the House today.

Will my right hon. Friend ask the National Film Finance Corporation to make a film of the Black and Tans?

Is it not quite ludicrous that one Government Department should spend a great deal of money in encouraging recruitment to the Armed Forces while other sources of public finance are devoted to denigrating them? Will the right hon. Gentleman take action in the matter?

This certainly illustrates the difficulties we get into if public money is used to finance films. We have been urged by hon. Members on both sides of the House to continue this system.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall raise the matter at an early moment.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many privately-owned and advance factories have been established with Government assistance under regional development legislation in Cornwall, Penzance, St. Ives and Helston during the past six years; how many of these factories derived from inquiries first received after 31st October, 1964; and how many firm contracts have been entered into to build new factories in these places since that date.

Fifteen completed factory projects in Cornwall—about 287,000 sq. ft. in total—have been established with Government assistance under the Local Employment Acts; two of these projects are in Penzance, one in Helston and none in St. Ives. No record is available about inquiries for particular areas. Since October, 1964, contracts have been placed for four factories built by the Board of Trade; I have no information about contracts placed by other organisations.

Does the Minster agree that now that cash grants in development areas have been raised to 45 per cent. it merely restores investment incentives in development areas to the position in which they were before 1964, considered on a cash flow basis? Will he pay particular attention to the need to encourage industry to move into these areas, in view of the fact that unemployment is now higher in some parts of the county than it has been since the war.

We are well aware of the need for additional employment in Cornwall. That is why we have extended the development area. The new cash grants which will be made available should be a great inducement to firms to go to that area. We have built and are building factories in the area, and are hoping to find suitable tenants.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that the main concern in Cornwall is the difficulty of finding tenants for some of the Board of Trade advance factories? I should be grateful if his Department would consider taking further action as soon as possible to find tenants for the factories which are being built and those which are being planned.

Yes.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he has had with foreign Governments about aircraft noise.

Her Majesty's Government convened an International Conference in London last month on the reduction of noise and disturbance caused by civil aircraft. Representatives of 26 Commonwealth and foreign Governments attended.

Can the hon. Member say what were the practical results of that conference? What has been decided?

The conference achieved far more than we had hoped. Flowing from it there will be a published report. The two main things agreed were that there should be serious consideration of a noise certification to be attached to the certificate of airworthiness, and, secondly, the consideration of steeper glide paths over airports. Both questions are subject to much consultation, particularly with the pilots' organisations.

Does this mean that we are going to control the noise made by civil aircraft while allowing military aircraft to make as much noise as they like?

Perhaps my hon. Friend will address that question to the Under-Secretary of State for Defence for the Royal Air Force.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, following the International Noise Conference, whether he will propose to other countries which manufacture aircraft a convention on maximum permitted noise emitted by aircraft engines whilst landing or taking off.

The conference showed that there are good prospects for a scheme on the lines my right hon. Friend mentioned in the aviation debate on 21st November, and I hope to make a full statement to the House on what we propose before long. We shall certainly keep in close touch with other aircraft manufacturing countries.

What detailed proposals has the Minister of State to offer concerning approach noise? Is he aware that the scheme for soundproofing proposed by the Prime Minister in a speech before the election of 1964 has proved a complete failure? With what is he intending to replace the Prime Minister's gimmick?

I am sorry that the hon. Gentleman, who takes a great interest in this topic, should denigrate the measures that we are taking to obviate this nuisance, none of which measures his Government took when in office.

Does my hon. Friend recognise that among residents in the areas around the airport there is considerable pleasure as a result of this scheme, which the Prime Minister had started after the election? Does he recognise, however, that the only way to stop noise is at source, and that the soundproofing scheme is an inadequate substitute for the measures that he is proposing?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for those comments. That is precisely what we are doing. We are making serious attempts to tackle this problem at source, which means in the production of aero-engines.

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

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the need to restrict nuisance caused by noise, if he will direct the Airports Authority to use runways others than those running east-west at Heathrow.

Only the east-west runways are long enough—and have the necessary aids—to permit the large jet aircraft using Heathrow to carry out regularly all types of operations without extremely severe restrictions on the load they can carry. To bring the other runways up to similar standards would be very costly and large numbers of people would still be disturbed by aircraft noise.

Will the Minister look at this problem a little more seriously? He has said that there is no serious problem of noise in central London. That is not true. Will he consider, first, whether these runways could be lengthened, with the necessary aid being provided? This would make a real improvement in the situation?

The hon. Gentleman must not take my words out of context. The problem is relative. Over central London is is not as bad as it is over the airport. Secondly, if steps were taken to extend the runways many other people would be affected by noise, and it would be a very costly operation. We do not think that it is necessary at this time.

If any proposal is made for steeper glide paths will the Minister give an absolute assurance that far more important than noise to any constituents in any constituency is the factor of the safety of aircraft and their passengers?

The hon. Gentleman is right. No steps would be taken to increase the glide path unless we had fully consulted the British Airline Pilots' Association, which would be very concerned with the question of safety.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects the third major airport for London will be in operation.

The date depends on the site chosen.

Will the hon. Member be a little more forthcoming? Cannot he give any indication of this? Does not he realise that the diversion of traffic from London Airport represents the only hope that many residents in central London have of a reduction in the intolerable level of noise to which they are subjected?

A decision will be taken on this matter quite soon.

Will the Minister also bear in mind the fact that by the time this airport is built the large jumbo jets will be operating and that the question of transport between the airport and London is of vital importance? Will he take that fact into consideration in coming to a quick conclusion on this matter?

asked the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to raise the minimum permitted height for aircraft over central London.

The possibility of restricting further the descent of aircraft over central London is under continuous study but no significant changes can be made at present.

Will the hon. Gentleman consider this question very carefully? Does he agree that there is a direct relationship between height and noise, and that glide paths over central London—referred to in his previous Answer—could be raised in order that aircraft should fly higher?

Over central London aircraft are monitored and must fly no lower than 2,000 feet. Therefore it is not a great problem. The greatest problem arises nearer the airport. When an aircraft is over central London it is much further from the point where it intercepts the proper glide path, where it becomes steeper. This question was raised at the international conference, and further studies are being carried out.

Will my hon. Frind have sympathy for constituents of mine—such as my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade—who live in central London at a height more than 100 feet above sea level, therefore being much nearer the level at which aircraft fly?

I shall certainly take note of that.

Does the Minister realise that this is a serious problem for central London and that international action of the kind referred to in an earlier Question is essential? Cannot he undertake to take action, with other Governments, to consider this problem?

That is precisely what we have done. It would be a good idea if Members who take a great interest in this matter would await the published report which will flow from this conference.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what effect on manufacturing investment he expects to arise from the recent initiative by Her Majesty's Government to join the Common Market.

I cannot form any estimate.

Yes, but would the right hon. Gentleman confirm that he agrees with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that one of the presumed advantages of British membership of the Common Market would be a rise in manufacturing investment?

I always agree with my right hon. Friend, but this is a matter of presumption rather than an estimate.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what assessment has been made of the growth in imports consequent upon entry to the European Economic Community.

No assessment of the effect on total imports is possible. Imports from other member countries of the Community would no doubt increase as well as our exports to them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the level of imports into this country has been consistently underestimated during the past few years and that this level of imports is likely to rise very rapidly upon entry of the Common Market? This matter is worthy of his greatest and closest attention.

Yes Sir, they have already been rising for a long time. In considering the effect of any adhesion to the E.E.C. on our balance of payments, we have to consider possible increases in exports but also the possible increase in imports and the effects on our own costs of production.

In reference to his Answer to Question No. 28 and to the present one, would my right hon. Friend urge his colleagues to furnish some adequate and accurate information about the benefits of entering the Common Market, as no one has yet the foggiest notion of what will happen?

That is a very pertinent question, but it is not the one on the Order Paper.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he intends to introduce legislation for consumer protection on the lines of the Protection of Consumers (Trade Descriptions) Bill introduced in the last Parliament.

I have nothing to add to the reply which I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Palmer) on 2nd May.—[Vol. 727, col. 78.]

The right hon. Gentleman has given this reply on more than one occasion since then. The Bill was published at the beginning of the year. Is it not now time that he gave this matter priority?

I am anxious to introduce this Bill as soon as possible, but Parliamentary time depends on the Opposition as well as the Government. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman will urge his own Chief Whip to co-operate through the usual channels in finding more time for this kind of thing.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this was one of the Bills in the Queen's Speech in November, 1965, which the Prime Minister, in the Debate on the Address, said had a higher priority than the Steel Bill? Will he recognise that some of us think that he could create a situation in which it could still have a higher priority?

Yes, and I am sure that, when it is introduced, it will have the hon. Gentleman's support.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on his meeting with the deputation received from the Advertising Association on 3rd November; and what legislation he proposes to introduce arising from these discussions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a statement on his meeting with representatives of the Advertising Association on 3rd November on the subject on advertising ethics.

We had a useful discussion of various matters of interest to the advertising industry, including the proposed new legislation to prohibit false or misleading advertisements of goods and services. I have no other plans for legislation in this field.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that a complete examination of this industry is urgently required? Will he examine the claims made by that deputation that increased advertising expenditure leads to a reduction in prices, as this is simply not the case? Will he examine the matter much more closely?

We do not necessarily accept those claims, but the first thing is to introduce the legislation of which I spoke.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the advertising business has gone a long way towards improving its own standards in this respect? Will he accept that it will be no advantage to have legislation here?

The advertising industry has certainly done something, but we believe that there is need for legislation on the lines that hon. Gentlemen opposite were urging on me earlier this afternoon.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he has taken as a result of his recent official visit to the Scandinavian countries to increase trade between those countries and North-East Scotland; and with what result.

I would refer my hon. and learned Friend to the Answer given to him on 19th May, 1966. In the first 10 months of this year our exports to Scandinavia and Finland increased by nearly 7½ per cent. compared with the corresponding period last year. North-East Scotland no doubt shared in this increase.

Does my right hon. Friend realise that these visits gave him a splendid opportunity to remove the astounding disparity between attempts to develop trade between North Britain on the one hand, and South Britain on the other with the Continent? What is he doing about North-East Scotland?

I am glad to say that, in the British Week in Oslo last summer, Scottish goods were very much in evidence.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many advance factories he has built in Aberdeen during the last six months; and how many he plans to build during the next six months.

As my right hon. Friend informed my hon. and learned Friend on 10th November, construction of the 12,500 sq. ft. advance factory in Aberdeen, announced in September, 1965, began in August, 1966, and is expected to be completed next April. A further advance factory of 27,500 sq. ft. was included in the programme my right hon. Friend announced on 3rd November.

I thank the Minister of State for that Answer. Does he realise that the advance factories which have already been built there have been snapped up at once, and that, owing to the attractions of Aberdeen as an industrial centre, more advance factories are needed?

Yes, Sir, and I think that my hon. and learned Friend would also like me to point out that the two advance factories to which I referred are the first to have been allocated in Aberdeen since the war.