asked the Minister of Technology what consultation he has had with the Geddes Committee on changes in the outlook for shipbuilding since the Geddes Report was written.

None, Sir. The Geddes Committee was disbanded when it completed its Report. My right hon. Friend is, of course, in contact with the Shipbuilding Industry Board through the Chairman.

Will the Joint Parliamentary Secretary recognise that there have been some changes and that the prospects of home shippers ordering at home are no better than they were—indeed, are perhaps a little worse—and will he also recognise that the Geddes Report is now not entirely up to date?

The main recommendations of the Geddes Report are certainly up to date in respect of, for example, the importance of amalgamations in this industry. As the hon. Gentleman is aware, we will shortly be introducing legislation.

Is my hon. Friend asserting that the shipbuilders, through the Shipbuilding Conference, have never made any representation to the Ministry or to any other Department—perhaps to the Board of Trade—since the Geddes Report was published?

Certainly there have been representations, as my right hon. Friend said last week. Their representations on the subject of home credit facilities are now being considered.

asked the Minister of Technology whether he is aware that British shipbuilding is losing the home market because it is unable to offer credit terms competitive with those available to British owners abroad; and whether he will take immediate steps to extend favourable credit terms to British owners ordering British ships.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will take steps to review and bring the recommendations of the Geddes Committee up to date, in view of the rapidly changing and deteriorating situation facing the British shipbuilding industry.

My right hon. Friend is well aware of the position, but these current difficulties emphasise the need for the industry to press on with its plans for reorganisation on the lines proposed by the Geddes Committee.

Will the hon. Gentleman recognise that the pressure of the Opposition for better credit facilities is very reasonable indeed and that the Treasury is probably again being penny wise and pound foolish in this matter? Will he press his right hon. Friend to stand up to the Treasury in this matter?

We are getting ahead with this question of credit facilities for home owners as rapidly as possible. The hon. Gentleman should realise that the lack of credit facilities is not the whole of this problem. The competitiveness of the industry is of very great importance.

Is my hon. Friend aware that what is needed is a speeding up of the implementation of the Geddes recommendations, that the industry is waiting for this to happen and that we in the North-East are particularly looking forward to this happening?

We have maintained the timetable of the Geddes Committee in every respect and, as I said earlier, legislation will be introduced very shortly.

Would the hon. Gentleman press his right hon. Friend to exercise pressure on the Leader of the House to implement the pledge, given a long time ago, that we would have a proper debate on the shipbuilding industry? That pledge has never been implemented. Is it not time that the Government kept one pledge, if they cannot keep any others?

I am sure that the debate on the Second Reading of the Bill, when it is introduced, will give the hon. Lady an opportunity to speak on this subject.

Would my hon. Friend also press the President of the Board of Trade to try to speed up the machinery of the E.C.G.D. procedure, which is causing serious difficulty to some shipbuilders in obtaining suitable credit terms for export orders?

I hope that my hon. Friend will refer to me any particular case he has in mind where slowness on the part of E.C.G.D. is holding up orders.

asked the Minister of Technology what recommendations contained in the Geddes Report have been implemented.

There is nothing more to report since I answered the Questions by the hon. Members for Dorset, South (Mr. Evelyn King) and Belfast, East (Mr. McMaster) on 17th January last.—[Vol 739, c. 21.]

Is not my right hon. Friend aware that one of the principal recommendations of the Geddes Report was the need for improved credit facilities for British shipbuilders? Is he aware that that is supported not only by Opposition Members, but by many Members on this side of the House? Is he also aware that far too many orders are going abroad, to the detriment of the British shipbuilding industry?

I am very well aware of what my right hon. Friend says. He will, however, be aware that the credit schemes that were included in the Geddes Report were linked to the regrouping. Since the Question refers to the Geddes Report, perhaps I might take the opportunity of reinforcing the need for these shipyards to come together with proposals for the Shipbuilding Industry Board so that we can really strengthen British industry.

Is the Minister aware that unemployment has risen to 8 per cent. in Northern Ireland due to the Westminster Government's economic policy? Which of the Geddes Recommendations will be implemented to help Harland and Wolff, of Belfast?

The hon. and learned Member knows that the future of the British shipbuilding industry and the employment that it can give to those who work in shipyards depend upon creating really strong units. It was upon this that the Geddes Report concentrated. This is central in our policy for the shipbuilding industry and I hope that when the Bill shortly comes before the House it will have the support of both sides.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I give notice that I will raise this matter on an early occasion.

asked the Minister of Technology what percentages of machine tools manufactured in Great Britain were numerically controlled in 1965; what are the estimates for 1970; and what steps he is taking to accelerate the conversion from conventional to numerical control.

In the 12 months ending in September, 1966, the proportion was 0·36 per cent. by number, and 2·5 per cent. by value. These proportions are increasing, but it is not possible to make an accurate forecast for 1970. The Department's preproduction order and "trial period" scheme should increase demand.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that there is a very close correlation between the spreading of numerically controlled machine tool manufacture and the whole process of re-equipping and modernising industry? Is he aware that in the United States this is expanding by 10 per cent. to 15 per cent. per year, and that it is estimated that by 1970, 70 per cent. to 80 per cent. of the total will be numerically controlled, and that similar growth is being made in many other industrial countries?

I am aware of the importance of numerically controlled machine tools, both in their production and getting them in use in workshops, and in making sure that engineering design is modified to take advantage of numerically controlled techniques. We are encouraging their use over the whole range of manufacturing.

asked the Minister of Technology what is the percentage change in the recorded value of net new home orders for machine tools during January-November, 1966, compared with the corresponding figure for 1965; what is the percentage change after allowing for inflation during this period; how these changes compare with the targets or forecasts contained in the National Plan; and if he will make a statement.

Recorded orders were 6 per cent. lower in 1966. It is not possible to calculate what exact allowance for higher prices can be made in the value of orders.

Is not this decline of 6 per cent. as compared with the promise of steady growth at the rate of 7·8 per cent. an extraordinarily pathetic performance? What does the hon. Gentleman expect may be the pattern to emerge during this year?

I do not think that the hon. Gentleman followed the Answer. The increase in output in 1965 was 11·9 per cent. In the first 11 months of 1966 it was 14 per cent. It is deliveries we have to look at in machine tools as well as orders.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will give the terms of reference for the recently established Advisory Board on Relations with the Universities.

asked the Minister of Technology whether the Advisory Board on Relations with the Universities which he has set up, under the chairmanship of Dr. S. C. Curran, F.R.S., will make an annual report; and if he will make a statement.

I will circulate the terms of reference in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that Answer. Will he consider the possibility of relating two other aspects of this problem: the financing of research projects and the need for better communications between technological institutes, either now or later?

The terms of reference already include all matters which affect relations between the Ministry of Technology and the universities. The second point raised by my hon. Friend is one of the major jobs which the Ministry was set up to do.

Do the terms of reference include the problem of enabling those who are at present mostly engaged in military science research engaging in civil science research?

Not really, because that comes under a different heading. However, one of the purposes of transferring the Ministry of Aviation to my Department is to make this sort of thing more possible.

Would not the Minister agree that the most important single factor for promoting faster technological growth in relation to the universities is the need to get firms closer to the departments of universities? We have gone beyond the days of vice-chancellors and the C.B.I. having great conferences. Surely this work must be done on the ground, so to speak, with the two sides being brought together.

Certainly, and that is why 59 liaison officers are situated in our technical colleges and universities. We have it in mind that the universities should play a fuller part in the areas of the country in which they operate; and I am glad to hear that this idea carries the support of the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Technology what proposals he will make to the nuclear power engineering industry to reorganise the existing consortia system to ensure the advancement of the British advanced gas-cooled and high-temperature reactor systems, with a view to exploiting fully the economic advantages available in domestic application, and the export potential in this field.

asked the Minister of Technology what progress is being made by the Atomic Energy Authority in the export of advanced gas-cooled reactor atomic power stations; and if he will make a statement.

The promotion of A.G.R. exports is handled by the British Nuclear Export Executive, in which the A.E.A. and the three nuclear consortia work together. The A.G.R. is already being considered in one major tender competition and there are a number of further prospects in the offing. I am at this moment considering how best to increase the efficiency of the nuclear industry and promote export business. I am arranging to have talks with the industry.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Would not he agree that we need a much stronger export organisation to exploit A.G.R. and our world lead in nuclear power, and that such an organisation should have a nationally agreed policy towards existing and anticipated world markets?

That and similar considerations led me to suggest the talks which will shortly be taking place with the industry.

Would my right hon. Friend say whether or not it is correct that it is 18 months since we sold a nuclear reactor? Is he aware that there is now considerable competition from America and that there is great concern that our lead in this field is being whittled away?

I am aware of all those considerations. That is why we are pressing ahead with these discussions. We wish to see how our export effort can be strengthened.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that last September the Board of Management of O.E.C.D. high-temperature reactor project "Dragon" announced that, on the information available from the performance of "Dragon" so far, it would be carrying out an assessment of the prospects for a nuclear power station of this type and that the results of that assessment would be available early in 1967? Can the right hon. Gentleman say when this report will be published and whether he considers that high-temperature reactors have a place in the British nuclear power programme?

That is a separate question.

No. Iit is a part of the Question.

With respect, a specific O.E.C.D. project, the "Dragon" project, raises a specific question; and there is a later Question on the Order Paper on that subject. However, I have in mind the considerations put by the hon. Gentleman.

While agreeing that this problem is not as easy as the Question might suggest, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman would agree that the C.E.G.B., for perfectly sound reasons, has been encouraging the nuclear engineering industry to go for very large stations, whereas at the moment such export orders as do exist appear to be for relatively small stations? What views has the right hon. Gentleman about how we could marry these quite separate needs together for the benefit of our exports?

It is true that the A.G.R. involves considerable capital cost. However, the steam generating heavy water reactor which is going up a Winfrith is of a different kind and may have wider application. Coming along also is the fast reactor. Looking ahead to our export effort, which I hope will be vigorous, we must consider the new possibilities opened up by new reactor systems.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a statement on the progress towards the construction of a British-built prototype nuclear-propelled merchant vessel.

There is nothing that I can add to my right hon. Friend's reply to the hon. Member for Sheffield, Heeley (Mr. Hooley) on 20th December, 1966.— [Vol 738, c. 211.]

In view of the fact that five nations are now building or planning to build nuclear ships, none of which will be economic, can the hon. Gentleman give any information about what is happening in research or forward planning to keep Britain in this race, which is of great importance to us as a maritime nation?

As the hon. Member will realise, the core of this problem is the production of a small reactor suitable for this purpose. The Atomic Energy Authority is keeping its eye on all work that is being done in this respect, but until the industry comes forward with a real risk-sharing project I do not think that the Government can take any action.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that this country has a unique combination of experitise in both nuclear power and shipbuilding? Is it not high time that we took advantage of this fact to exploit this field of technology?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that we are leaders in both these fields. Nevertheless, we still have to produce a small reactor which will enable us to build a ship that will operate economically.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will take steps to set up a Government consultancy service to assist firms to raise their efficiency and productivity.

My Department's "Business Bureau" is already providing services of this kind, a list of which I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that there is need, however, to extend this service? Does he agree that one of the great problems of British industry is the number of medium and small firms with "old-boy" type managements who have no idea how or where they are going? Would my right hon. Friend further agree that the pioneer work done by the D.S.I.R. shows that an outstanding Government service can be provided in this direction at remarkably low cost?

I agree with everything my hon. Friend has said. The fact is that this is being pressed ahead as rapidly as possible. There are 100 qualified people working in the regional liaison offices, 59 industrial liaison officers in the universities and colleges, various specialist national services and procurement advisory services, and £1 million has been put into the Production Engineering Advisory Service which begins within a few weeks. Although I recognise the importance of this matter, it has to be set in the wider context of voluntary and other Government services as well. We are well aware of it.

Does the Minister expect the fall in national productivity, which last month fell by 4½ per cent. to the lowest it has been for two years, to continue? If so, what more can he do to stop this fall?

In so far as the question relates to the general economic situation, it goes beyond the ambit of the Question. I assure the hon. Member, however, that one of the effects of the present difficulties has been to encourage a number of firms to come and seek advice to see whether they could not escape from their own difficulties by raising productivity. This has been very encouraging.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans he has to coordinate and rationalise the activities of the various bodies and groups responsible for the development of air-cushion vehicles, in view of the fact that these bodies and groups are all now within the ambit of his Department.

I am considering the arrangements for the co-ordination of Government research and development in hovercraft. As a first step the National Physical Laboratory will take over responsibility on 1st April for the Hythe Technical Group, a subsidiary body of the National Research Development Corporation. The Hythe Group is the largest Government-financed research and development unit now working in this field and the broad outlines for its future have been agreed. With permission, I will circulate further details of these arrangements in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Does the Minister's reply mean that as from 1st April the National Research Development Corporation will have no responsibility for the development of the hovercraft industry?

No, certainly not. The relationship between N.R.D.C. and Hovercraft Development Ltd. and others in this field will remain. Here, however, was a centre of research which, we felt, should not be limited to one of the developments but should be generally available. I would greatly welcome further proposals for future development of hovercraft from other sources.

When H.D.L. comes under the National Physical Laboratory, will it become a division of the N.P.L. or will it retain the degree of managerial independence which it enjoyed as long as it was a subsidiary of the N.R.D.C., which all would agree had value?

I ought to explain that H.D.L. is not coming under the N.P.L., but the Hythe Technical Unit is. This means that Government research in hovercraft will be available for others who want to move into this field. H.D.L.'s position remains unaffected.

asked the Minister of Technology what consideration he is giving to the recommendation made in the Interim Report of the Working Group on Manpower Parameters for Scientific Growth, Command Paper No. 3102, that further attention should be given to meeting demand in industry and the schools at least in part by redeployment from other sectors such as Government research establishments.

This recommendation is being taken fully into consideration in reviewing the programmes of work and staff requirements at Government research establishments under my right hon. Friend's control.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the sombre fact that in many secondary schools in Scotland and England, serious teaching for senior pupils in physics and chemistry is slowly grinding to a halt for want of teachers? Will he make special efforts to see that many in research departments for which his Department is responsible and who are, perhaps, over the age of 40 or 45 will be given the opportunity of teaching in grammar and comprehensive schools?

If the current reviews which we are undertaking show that the demand of Government research establishments for qualified manpower might properly be reduced, this could benefit school teaching and industry. My hon. Friend will, however, remember that there are other difficulties. There can be no question of direction of staff and there are difficulties, for example, in the matter of relative salaries.

asked the Minister of Technology what plans he has for further co-operation with European countries in research and development in technological industries.

My right hon. Friends the Prime Minister and the Foreign Secretary, in their discussions with the Governments of the Six about our possible accession to the European Economic Community, are exploring the scope for increased technological collaboration within Europe and best way of doing it.

Is it not vital for our industries and their continual advancement that this co-operation should take place and, more than that, that it is a sort of preparation for our entry into the Common Market? Will the Minister therefore redouble his efforts for his Ministry to see that this co-operation becomes a reality?

As the hon. Member knows, a number of collaborative efforts are already operating between firms in this country and firms on the Continent. There are also certain inter-Governmental collaborative efforts. When I was in Bonn recently talking to Herr Stoltenberg, the Minister for Scientific Research, I discussed with him another aspect of this problem, namely, the possibility of getting computer standardisation so as to make possible a further strengthening of the European computer industry. I think that in these ways the objectives of European industrial strength will be met.

Would not the Minister agree that the prospects of purely technological collaboration are limited unless we get right the commercial, economic and political infrastructure as proposed in the Treaty of Rome?

It certainly has been the experience of my Department, having been set up as a Ministry of Technology, that in two years it has developed into a Ministry of Industry. I suspect that Europe in a sense requires a Ministry of Technology or some equivalent organisation. In so far as that is what the hon. Member is suggesting, I greatly welcome it.

asked the Minister of Technology how many leading hovercraft engineers and designers have left British firms and organisations to take up employment with their American competitors; and if he will take steps, by legislation or otherwise, to ensure that British patents and "know-how" are not given to their American competitors by means of a brain drain of this type.

Exact statistics are not available; but I know of six hovercraft technologists who have left this country to work in the U.S.A. during the last four or five years.

Where Government finance has been used to develop the hovercraft and other ventures, what steps have been taken to ensure that senior engineers, technicians and technologists are bound by contract or agreement not to take part in similar activities in this country or elsewhere? Will the Parliamentary Secretary look into this situation to ensure that when we develop technologies of this type, there are contracts which bind people to Government finance as well as other technological developments?

I will certainly look into what the hon. Member says. I should, however, emphasise that American patents have been granted to us which correspond to the British hovercraft patents and are protected by American law.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that the House has been told by the Prime Minister and other Ministers during the past two years that when the TSR2 contract was cancelled the engineers engaged upon it would go into the export business, but that this simply has not happened? Why do the Government shirk the responsibility of finding out from the firms involved how, when and where these men go when they leave these very important companies?

In this case, we know where these men have gone. I remind the hon. Member, however, that the reason why there is a lack of statistics in this area is because when right hon. Gentlemen opposite were in office they discontinued these statistics.

asked the Minister of Technology what consideration he is now giving to the construction of a 300 megawatt steam generating heavy water reactor; what estimate he has made of the capital cost per kilowatt, and the generating cost of each unit of electricity; and what information has already been gained from the steam generating heavy water reactor at Winfrith Heath.

The construction of the prototype S.G.H.W. reactor at Winfrith is on schedule and it should be on power this autumn. Data on it is being prepared, and costs forecast are promising. Discussions with potential customers are in progress.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what is the future for larger units based on information gained so far? Is not this another break through of which we can be proud?

Yes, indeed it is a great achievement of which there is much to be proud. It would, however, be premature to venture cost estimates even for the present reactor until it is actually on steam and the prototype has been proved.

asked the Minister of Technology how much Government money was spent last year on whisker chemistry; and whether he will intensify research effort in this field in the future.

Government expenditure last year on whisker technology was approximately £85,000 shared between Ministry of Aviation, the Atomic Energy Authority, and the Science Research Council. The future of these programmes is currently under review.

In thanking my hon. Friend for his reply, may I ask whether, in view of the tremendous future importance of these new types of metal, he will ensure that there is adequate liaison and co-operation between those carrying out work in universities and industry and also in Government establishments?

The Ministry of Technology has had no request from industry for sponsorship of work in this field. It is an expensive field of research and we would be interested in any approaches. As for co-ordination with the universities, there is at present sponsorship amounting to a cost of £5,000, and we would certainly accept that there is scope for expansion here.

asked the Minister of Technology why he advertised in a pamphlet entitled, "The Engineers Day," a large picture of a slide rule obviously of foreign manufacture, when British-made slide rules are freely available.

I wrote fully to the hon. Member on 6th December on this subject and there is really nothing more I can say.

In thanking the Minister for that generous expression of regret, may I ask him to make amends by conceding that excellent British slide rules are made in Weymouth, in Dorset?

There is no doubt at all about the quality of British slide rules.

Why should my right hon. Friend apologise for buying foreign slide rules? After all, are we not going into the Common Market in the near future?

Except that in this case no foreign slide rule was bought. The designer picked out a group of slide rules for the poster. He did not notice that this was a foreign slide rule; it did not have the name on it. It passed a Committee including a representative of the engineering institutions, who did not notice the fact. As a result of the hon. Member's activity, it has now received wide publicity.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a further statement on the effects of the Chrysler takeover on the employment prospects of those now engaged at Rootes' Linwood factories and the additional numbers who may expect to be employed there.

I am informed that Rootes Motors Ltd. plan to increase considerably the output of its Linwood plants. These developments will involve an increase in employment of some 4,000–5,000 phased over about five years.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that, following his statement last Tuesday that employment at Rootes at Linwood would increase by several thousand, a Rootes spokesman stated that those figures were purely speculative? Has my right hon. Friend any comment to make on that?

I am glad to say that I am not answerable for what Rootes say, but my understanding of the expansion plan is that the employment will rise by this amount in the period I have mentioned. The pressings plant, which has been on a four-day week, went on to full time today. The car plant, which has been on a four-day week, went on to full time yesterday. Therefore, employment has already increased.

What is the right hon. Gentleman's understanding of how the Rootes-Chrysler plans for Linwood fit in with its plans for Coventry? Is there to be a similar expansion for Coventry? Is Coventry to run down? Or is it to remain at its present level?

The fact that we were involved in the negotiations with Rootes and Chrysler does not make me answerable for the full development of the plans. The position, as was explained clearly last week, is that there is a Rootes expansion plan and that Linwood, in which the Government have considerable investment of public money, was specifically mentioned. It is the hope that Rootes will grow and develop, and this is one reason why the I.R.C. director has been put on the board.

asked the Minister of Technology what steps he is taking to ensure the maximum co-operation between the National Computing Centre at Manchester and the proposed Institute of Computer Sciences and Cybernetics shortly to be established in London.

I have no doubt that the National Computing Centre will seek to co-operate appropriately with all bodies established in fields related to its work.

In view of the Government's decision to attempt to separate science from technology, putting science under the Department of Education and Science and technology under the Minister's Department, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that before this Institute is set up the Government will consult Dr. Rose, who I understand is to be the chairman of the organising body of this new Institute, to see whether he and Professor Black together will advise the Ministers as to the best Ministerial responsibilities, in so far as they exist?

The proposed Institute is an entirely unofficial body. Co-ordination in the official field between the Department of Education and Science and the Ministry of Technology is extremely close over the whole field of computer applications; and through the Computer Board, the National Computing Centre and other advisory bodies there is very effective co-ordination.

asked the Minister of Technology what action Her Majesty's Government are taking, as Members of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, to obtain an early decision from those countries which are also members of Euratom that will enable the Dragon Project at Winfrith to be continued until 1970.

The United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority, as the United Kingdom signatory to the Dragon Agreement, has been active in seeking to extend the Dragon Agreement to 1970. Her Majesty's Government are supporting the Authority by representation through our Embassies in Euratom countries.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that as long ago as May of last year the chief executive of the Dragon Project, at a lecture in London, said that it was hoped that an early decision would be made on this matter then? We are now well into 1967. What steps is the right hon. Gentleman specifically seeking to take with the Euratom countries to get them to agree to a third five-year plan?

I have described one method I have adopted. I also discussed it when I took the Chair at the Euratom United Kingdom Continuing Committee. I took it up with Herr Stoltenberg in Bonn last week. There is no doubt that it is important, but the hon. Gentleman will have to recognise that, if he is advocating international organisations on a European pattern, the budgetary problems when five Governments are discussing what they will pay over a five-year period may well create serious difficulties for projects of this kind.

asked the Minister of Technology if he will make a report upon the development work being carried out by Hovercraft Development Limited, of Hythe, upon the hovertrain.

Hovercraft Development Ltd. has been continuing experimental work on the hovertrain and is in discussion with the Railways Board.

Does the Parliamentary Secretary recognise that the French are going ahead with M. Jean Bertin's aerotrain and are having a 10 kilometre trial on it and that ours is technically on paper superior? Could we get a move on in doing an experiment with British Railways, because this offers tremendous prospects for inter-provincial passenger travel?

I am aware of the interesting work going on in France on this matter. A joint study is now being undertaken with the Ministry of Transport on future prospects for hovertrains in this country.

Would the Parliamentary Secretary confirm that this work is among the work being taken over by the National Physical Laboratory on 1st April?

I shall have to write to the hon. Gentleman on that point.

asked the Minister of Technology what administrative arrangements he has made in conjunction with the Secretary of State for Defence to redeploy within, or to release from, the public service qualified scientists and engineers who are no longer required on defence projects, including those employed by the Atomic Energy Authority.

We are dealing with this problem by continuing collaboration with other Government Departments and the United Kingdom Atomic Energy Authority.

Will the Parliamentary Secretary give the House an undertaking that at some point in the Department's studies it will give some solid information to the House?

I can now inform the hon. Gentleman that, as a result of reductions in the defence programme, several hundred qualified scientists and engineers have been released from the Atomic Energy Authority since 1962. The hon. Gentleman will find some information on this subject in the recent Report of the Willis Jackson Committee.

asked the Minister of Technology on what grounds he allowed Granada T.V. Rentals to adjust their agreements with customers in such a way as in effect to increase prices and if he will now make a statement on television rental charges.

This company has made no approach to my Department regarding these adjustments to its charges. I have, however, arranged for enquiries to be made.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there will be considerable satisfaction with that Answer and we await the outcome of the investigations?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for saying this. There have been a number of letters about it. Some difficulties have arisen because charges which were raised before 20th July came up only when individual rental arrangements became due for renewal and, therefore, not all the cases which have been brought to my attention have indicated a rise in charges since July.

The Minister says that he has not been approached by this company. Will he none the less confirm that at law there is absolutely no requirement whatever on this company to have informed the Government of its proposal to increase charges?

That is perfectly correct, but since a Question was tabled about it I explained that I had not been approached by this company but was making inquiries. There is no confusion at all about the legal position here.

When my right hon. Friend is undertaking this study, will he also make a study of the type of literature which is being issued by television rental companies to their customers about increased prices? I am sure that he will agree that this amounts to little less than political propaganda and that some of the figures are very doubtful indeed.

I am not making this inquiry. My right hon. Friend the First Secretary of State and I are referring it to the National Board for Prices and Incomes. Those increases in rental which have come to our attention have always been below that which would have been justified by the taxation changes which were permitted.