asked the Minister of Overseas Development what effect devaluation has had on aid projects.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what review he has undertaken of the cost of overseas aid since devaluation; what decision he has reached as to economics; and what action he is taking where the aided territory has not devalued its currency, following the devaluation of the £ sterling.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if he will make a statement on the effect of devaluation on overseas aid programmes.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what estimate he has made of the effect of devaluation on the Government's overseas aid and development programme; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what effect devaluation has had on the value of aid given to overseas countries; and whether he proposes to make up the shortfall.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether British contributions paid in sterling to United Nations aid and development projects will be increased to offset the effect of devaluation.

The effects of devaluation on our overseas aid are complex and vary from one country to another. The matter is under close study but I am not yet able to make a statement.

But did not the right hon. Gentleman go to see the Prime Minister yesterday on this very subject? Therefore, can he not tell us in principle whether aid is an area which is sacrosanct or an area which is not sacrosanct?

My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister made it clear to the House a few days ago that all aspects of public expenditure, at home and abroad, are under study.

Where countries have not followed through into devaluation, will there be no question of making up the amount?

I said that the whole matter was under study and, of course, that aspect among others is being considered.

Surely the value of the aid will have to be increased or the programmes cut. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether the purchasing power of Britons working in overseas territories under aid schemes will be cut?

There is a Question on the Order Paper later on the latter point. On the broader question, there is clearly some reduction in the value of the aid in certain countries. It depends on whether the country devalues. It depends on the way in which the aid is given. There is an effect, but it is very difficult to measure. We are studying what the effect is and what policy decisions need to be made arising from it.

Can my right hon. Friend say what the effect will be on multilateral agencies to which we have obligations such as the I.D.A. and the specialised agencies of the United Nations?

That is an important aspect. A lot of our obligations to multilateral agencies are expressed in dollars. They will require adjustment in the amount of sterling paid in order to maintain the dollar value of the contribution.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government statement that there will be an increased amount of aid for the forthcoming year still stands?

I do not think that I can answer that precisely because all expenditure is under review at present. I hope that I will carry the whole House with me in saying that a significant aid programme from this country and every other developed country to developing countries is an important and permanent part of our policy and something to which we would all pay particular attention.

Would my right hon. Friend bear in mind that, while we are making a close scrutiny of our economic affairs, large sections of humanity are living in much worse economic circumstances than we are? In spite of our present difficulties, we shall inevitably increase our trade with the developing countries as they advance in the decades ahead.

I agree. I repeat that a substantial aid programme is an important and permanent part of our policy, both on humanitarian grounds and in our own long-term interests.

Is not this the moment to reconsider schemes for tying aid from under-utilised capacity in this country to developing countries? Have the pilot scheme of the right hon. Member for Barnet (Mr. Maudling) and plans thought about by this Government been reconsidered?

A good deal of our aid is at present tied to goods and services in this country. Clearly, this is something which we should always keep under review. As I said earlier, the whole question of policy and the size of our programme is being studied, just as every other aspect of Government expenditure is being studied.

Would the Minister assure the House that the overseas purchasing value of salaries paid to British officers serving under aid schemes abroad will not be reduced as a result of devaluation?

There is a later Question on that subject.

If no decision has been made concerning cuts in the amount of aid received by overseas countries, would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that it is better to give aid to those countries which subsequently ex- press some gratitude for it and to eliminate aid to those countries which in certain respects merely hurl abuse at us?

A number of considerations are taken into account when deciding the priorities for aid, but it would be wrong to become too obsessed with the consideration which the hon. Member mentioned. If a political figure or diplomat makes a silly remark, it is not a particularly good reason for cutting off aid to his country.

Would the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that British commodity markets and our invisible exports have suffered major losses amounting to millions of £s owing to non-devaluation in various aided countries in the Commonwealth?

That may be true. The Questions were directed to the effect of devaluation on the aid programme. The effect of devaluation on the economies of developing countries or the effect of their decisions on ours is a rather wider matter.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what steps he is taking in his plans for future aid to restore the financial position of countries such as Malawi which had suffered a reduction of 14·3 per cent, in the value of their reserves by reason of the devaluation of the £ sterling.

Although all the resources of recipient countries are considered when aid allocations are made, aid is not provided to increase reserves. Since Malawi has devalued to the same extent as the United Kingdom, the value of her sterling reserves has, in fact, remained constant in relation to her own currency as well as in terms of her sterling purchasing power.

But the value of those reserves externally has been diminished by 14·3 per cent. In those circumstances, does not the Minister accept that those countries that have suffered that kind of loss simply because they trusted us and kept their reserves here are morally entitled to a redeployment of aid in their favour?

The effect of devaluation on developing countries is very varied. In some aspects, their economies may suffer, whilst in others they may benefit from the effects of devaluation. It is very complex. Malawi is the fourth largest recipient of British aid in the world. About £40 million has gone to Malawi since its independence, so we cannot be accused of treating her ungenerously.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development how much has been paid out by Her Majesty's Government in the last three years in overseas aid to Governments which were not in diplomatic relations with us.

The amount was £8·2 million in the period October, 1964-September, 1967.

Will the right hon. Gentleman adopt a more robust attitude in cases where rudeness is brought to the point of breaking off diplomatic relations? What are these countries to do, short of war, to forfeit their aid? Will the Minister favour, rather, those countries which remain loyal to us, whatever reservations they may have about some parts of our policy?

In fact, the breaking off of diplomatic relations does have an effect on aid. It almost inevitably means a tapering off of aid. It does not necessarily mean that at that moment one ceases to disburse money under loan agreements already made. Of the figure I have indicated, the major part, £7·7 million, went to Tanzania and Sudan and most of it was released under agreements to which we were already committed before the breaking off of diplomatic relations. If there had been a sudden stoppage of that flow of money, it would have damaged trade in this country as well as in the two countries concerned.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether it is the policy of his Department to provide further aid to countries which have broken off diplomatic relations with, or defaulted in their financial obligations to, the British Government or to individual citizens; and which countries in either of these positions are at present in receipt of aid.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development to what extent when granting aid to developing countries he now takes into account the action of those countries or their subdivisions in taking over the assets of United Kingdom-registered companies without compensation.

As my hon. Friend told the right hon. Member for Kingston-upon-Thames (Mr. Boyd-Carpenter) on 24th November, 1966, we take into account all relevant factors, including those mentioned in the Questions, when considering new aid commitments. On aid to countries which have broken off diplomatic relations, I have nothing to add to my reply on 9th November to the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow). Those countries in default on financial obligations currently receiving aid in the form of technical assistance are Argentina, Brazil, Burma, Mexico, El Salvador, Syria, Tunisia, and the U.A.R.—[Vol. 736, c. 1561–62. Vol. 753, c. 177–8.]

In view of that Answer and the one to Question No. 4, does not the Minister think it better to help those countries to whom we have repudiated obligations by devaluation rather than those which have repudiated their obligations to us? How does the right hon. Gentleman supervise the administration of aid in countries which have taken the step of rupturing relations with us?

As I said in an earlier reply, it does not necessarily make sense automatically to sever all aid or trade links with countries if diplomatic relations are broken off. In the nature of things, trade and aid will taper off, and new aid commitments are unlikely to be made, but if there is a sudden severance it might be bad for interests in this country—to people concerned with the provision of goods, and so on—as well as in the countries concerned.

In spite of the helpful attitude of the Government of India towards overseas investment, is the Minister aware that the Government of West Bengal have forced on the Calcutta Tramways Company loss finance as a first charge by that Government; and that this is the first case of virtual expropriation without compensation of a British company in India?

I am aware of that situation, but I might be in trouble if I attempted to answer in detail. If the hon. Gentleman cares to write, I will give him a reply.

Can my right hon. Friend tell me what part of the aid which he mentioned in his Answer as going to the U.A.R. is designed to help that country to release British ships which are locked in the Canal?

As I said originally, the aid is in the form of technical assistance to the U.A.R. I think that Questions about the future of the ships are better directed to my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if he will make a statement on the effect of devaluation of the £ sterling on the 400,000 acre re settlement scheme in Kenya.

It is too early to say what effect, if any, devaluation will have on this scheme, but I have no reason to suppose at this stage that the scheme will not be satisfactorily completed.

Will not the amount of land to be purchased have to be reduced or the grant increased? Can the right hon. Gentleman at least assure us that the valuation, which in some cases has been 15 per cent., will not be further reduced because of devaluation?

The British Government and the Kenya Government are both committed, as the hon. Gentleman knows, to compensation expressed in East African shillings. The more general question of whether the amount of the loan will be adequate or whether there should be an increase is one aspect of the general review about which my right hon. Friend has been answering Questions.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether he will consider taking over the pensions of all ex-members of Her Majesty's Overseas Civil Service so as to overcome the diffi culties of some developing countries of the Commonwealth, the time lag over Income Tax reclaims, and the effect of devaluation.

No. These pensions are the responsibility of the overseas Governments concerned.

Is the Parliamentary Secretary aware that many members of Her Majesty's Overseas Civil Service are suffering greatly through delays in the repayment of Income Tax wrongly deducted by countries like Ceylon; and that they are also suffering from devaluation if they are living in countries outside England, in territories of the Commonwealth which have not devalued and where Income Tax has been increased? Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the Government are giving any consideration to the request made by the Government of Tanzania that the British Government should take over these pensions?

On the first point, it is true, particularly in relation to Ceylon, that there have been delays, which I recognise cause difficulties for pensioners, but we do take all action that is open to us to take to put forward the representations of these pensioners to the Ceylon Government. The effect of devaluation is a complex issue, according to whether or not the countries concerned have devalued. It is really too early to give a general statement about the position, but if the hon. Gentleman has any particular problems in mind, perhaps he will write, or put down a further Question. As I stated in my reply to the hon. Gentleman on 9th November, the position in Tanzania is still being considered.

I gather from what the hon. Gentleman has said that this disability falls on people who live outside England. Does it also fall on those who live outside Scotland?

The Minister has just said that it is too early to make a statement about the position. We fully understand that. But is he aware that what we on this side want to know is whether the Government are considering the point?

Indeed, yes. We are fully apprised of the problem.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. I beg to give notice that owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply I wish to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if he will make a statement on the work of the United Kingdom delegations to the specialised agencies of the United Nations.

My right hon. Friend is responsible for our relations with the Food aid Agriculture Organisation and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation, and I can assure my hon. Friend that our delegations play an active and constructive part in furthering the work of these agencies. I know that the same is true of British delegations to other specialised agencies.

I do not dispute that the delegations do very valuable work, but would not my hon. Friend agree that there is an unfortunate lack of detailed information in the House about the proposals being put forward in the name of Britain? Would it not be sound, for this reason and other reasons, to see the early establishment of a Select Committee on overseas development?

The establishment of such a Committee is not for me. As to detailed information available for hon. Members, I am aware of this problem in connection, for instance, with the Report of the biennial conference of U.N.E.S.C.O. I would be prepared to give further thought to how further information could be given to hon. Members.

Will the Minister give the House examples of the work that they are doing—either in the OFFICIAL REPORT or in other ways?

We have played a leading part. My right hon. Friend and other members of the delegations have played an important part in the considerations of the F.A.O. Conference in Rome recently. It. is a vast field. I do not think that at a Question and Answer session like this one can pick on particular items.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether he will take steps to secure international agreement on the establishment of an international investment insurance scheme applicable to under-developed countries.

We are already participating in discussions organised by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development on draft articles of agreement for an International Investment Insurance Agency.

While I welcome that Answer, may I ask whether my hon. Friend would agree that there is some urgency in this matter? It may be the most immediate problem which is preventing investment in the under-developed countries at the moment.

I agree about the importance of this question, and in that sense it is urgent, but I would not like to minimise the difficulties in reaching the necessary international agreement for the establishment of such a scheme.

In view of the urgency of the need for such a scheme, would the Minister give consideration not to an international agreement, but to an international convention which could link a series of national insurance schemes together rather than waiting the very long time necessary to reach a world consensus?

That is an interesting suggestion. It might enable earlier progress to be made.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether he will make a statement about compensating aid to Singapore as a result of the projected military withdrawal.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development whether he will make a statement about compensatory aid to Malaysia as a result of the projected military withdrawal.

We have offered grants of £1½ million to Singapore and £1 million to Malaysia in respect of the year 1967–68. Pending approval of Supplementary Estimates advances are being sought from the Civil Contingencies Fund in order that these sums may be made available to them. Consideration is still being given to subsequent aid.

Would the Minister not agree that before considering what compensatory aid could be given, a proper estimate should have been made of the full economic effects of the defence rundown? Is he aware that there is very considerable feeling in business circles in Singapore that this was not done? Unlike the Robens mission to Malta, the Dudley mission did not contain a single businessman. Will the Minister explain why no business opinion was consulted about this?

The mission led by Sir Alan Dudley is not the only mission which has gone. Economists went out from my Department earlier than that, so we have carried out the kind of study mentioned by the hon. Member. There have been a number of contacts with industrial representatives in Britain about the possibilities.

Will the Minister arrange for the aid to be sent to Singapore in such a way that British firms are certain of making a contribution to creating fresh jobs?

It is likely that the aid will need to go in a number of different ways, including some projects that will be linked with the plans of British firms. This is an aspect which we are studying very closely.

When my right hon. Friend is considering the report of the Dudley mission, will he bear in mind that some hon. Members on this side of the House are very cynical indeed about the requests of Mr. Lee Kuan Yeu for aid to Singapore? We feel that this country has done a great deal for Singapore. We welcome what has been done for the teachers' training college, but we urge him to have a very hard look at the requests that are made, which some of us feel may not be justified.

We are studying the whole problem very hard. To get it into perspective, it is important to realise that over 20 per cent, of the jobs in Singapore are jobs which arise from the British base. This is a country which already has a high rate of unemployment.

Earlier in his Answers the Minister used the term "a good deal of aid is tied aid". Will he now give an unequivocal assurance that the £1 million for Malaysia and the £1½ million for Singapore, a total of £2½ million, will be solely tied aid so that only British goods and services, to use spare capacity in this country, are given to these members of the Commonwealth?

No, Sir. I cannot give an assurance in relation to that, but when we—

Then your words are worthless.

No, they are not worthless. I wish that the hon. Member would pay proper attention to exactly what was said in reply to Questions instead of just shouting abuse across the Floor of the House. As to the larger sums we shall be considering for the future—if the hon. Member will listen— certainly a proportion is likely to be in the form of tied aid.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if he will give practical support to the proposals in the field of overseas development made by the President of the World Bank in a speech on 27th October, 1967, to the Swedish Bankers Association, a copy of which has been sent to him.

Consultations with other donors continue. If they are favourable to this proposal, Her Majesty's Government would give it any practical support they could.

While I thank the Minister for that Answer, but in view of the continued need for overseas aid as a long-term investment and this country's reduced resources, will the Ministry have a close look at some of Dr. Schumacher's plans for intermediate technology.

Yes. We are closely in touch with that group and we are studying its work. We have a number of contacts with it.

Will not my right hon. Friend agree that the advantage of schemes such as the World Bank and I.D.A. is that we do very well in terms of our exports out of multilateral programmes of this kind?

Yes. Of the total operations of I.D.A., it is true to say that we get approximately 30s. worth of orders for every £ we put into it. This is an example of the fact that the aid programme is generally a good investment for Britain in the long term as well as being right on moral grounds.

Is the Minister aware that the impression gained at the recent Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference at Kampala was that recipient countries would welcome a grand assize of this kind? Can we take it that the Government are very much in favour of this kind of approach to a major world problem?

Yes, we are in favour of it. We are discussing the matter at the moment with other countries. Clearly it will depend on some wide international agreement if it is to be set up in the way proposed by Mr. Woods.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what arrangements are being made to compensate officers serving overseas for the effect of devaluation on their salaries, all or part of which are paid by his department.

Officers employed by my Ministry overseas, or seconded overseas at its request from other Government Departments, will receive the same adjustments of their overseas allowances as other British Civil Servants serving overseas. Supplementary payments made by the Ministry to officers employed by overseas authorities whose currencies have not been devalued will also be appropriately adjusted.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what consultations he has had with representatives of the Confederation of British Industry to discuss ways in which its members may extract the maximum advantage from devaluation in the national interest; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend has had consultations with the Confederation of British Industry about the action which industry needs to take in order to make full use of the opportunities created by devaluation. This has also been considered in the National Economic Development Council and with the British National Export Council and the Departments concerned are having discussions with representatives of individual industries.

Would my hon. Friend agree that if the lowering of prices following devaluation is to continue for exports, this requires positive action on his part if the advantages of devaluation are not to be lost?

Of course, the opportunity to lower export prices is an important opportunity created by devaluation. But I am sure that my hon. Friend will realise that this must be a matter of commercial judgment in individual cases; and will depend in individual cases on different considerations, such as availability of capacity and price elasticity of the market. Whether it is better to spend more on after-sales service, and, indeed, a whole host of other considerations, must be a matter for commercial judgment.

Has the Minister yet been able to reassure representatives of industry that in the national interests the Industrial Expansion Bill will not now be proceeded with?

No, Sir.

Is my hon. Friend aware that some hon. Members on this side of the House regard the response of the Confederation of British Industry to devaluation as being thoroughly unpatriotic, disheartening and defeatist? Will he now in his forthcoming consultations with the C.B.I, make it plain that unless a more positive response takes place from that sector of the economy we shall certainly take steps to ensure that those firms which lag behind are taken into public ownership to encourage the export drive?

My hon. Friend will be aware that many companies have made a most positive reaction to devaluation. Although I would not be in agreement with everything that the C.B.I, has recently said, I would refer my hon. Friend to what the C.B.I. Council said on 6th December about the way industrial management should react to the opportunities given by devaluation of increasing their export effort and so forth, with which I am largely in agreement.

Will the Under-Secretary of State at once deprecate his hon. Friend's stigmatising of the leaders of British industry as unpatriotic? Is it not a fact that only yesterday evening leaders of the C.B.I, stigmatised Her Majesty's Government as being utterly unrealistic for turning down £200 million of South African arms orders?

My hon. Friends have at least as much right to criticise the C.B.I. as the C.B.I, has to criticise the Government.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what action he is taking to ensure that increases in the price of goods and services are no greater than those arising from the effects of devaluation; and what action he proposes in the case of those increases which have already exceeded the justified amounts.

I would refer my hon. Friend to the Reply on 8th December to my hon. Friend the Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell) which summarised the advice being given to industry and trade by Government Departments and the ways in which supervision of prices is exercised.—[Vol. 755, c 412–3.]

Will my right hon. Friend take the opportunity of the next few days before Christmas to prowl around the market places in order to realise just how much prices have been rising, and will he assure us that he will take just as positive action on the prices front as he has on the wages front, to ensure that everyone has a happier new year?

I am sure that, in the light of my hon. Friend's question, he will be pleased to know that we have this morning made a reference to the National Board for Prices and Incomes for quick examination of the question of distributors' margins in relation to manufacturers' recommended prices.

But is it not clear that, to the extent to which manufacturers are not allowed to price their goods as they think the market will bear, the Government themselves will have to take their own deflationary measures?

In the reply to which I have already referred, we stated the criteria upon which we expect industry to function. If there are increases which go outside that, we shall probably take action to refer them to the Board.

Will my right hon. Friend do everything in his power to stop excessive price increases in the public sector of industry and also in local government services?

Yes, Sir. My hon. Friend will know that the Government have already stated that such references will be made to the Prices and Incomes Board where there are large changes in nationalised industry prices.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what recent consultations he has had with the chairman of the National Board for Prices and Incomes on the Government's economic policy; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend meets the Chairman of the Board from time to time to discuss matters connected with the productivity, prices and incomes policy and has met him recently for this purpose. These discussions are confidential.

What consultations were there with Mr. Jones before his speech to the American Chamber of Commerce? Will my right hon. Friend try to persuade Mr. Jones to make less gloomy prognostications and to speak at least sometimes of the achievements of British industry, managers and workers alike?

We knew that Mr. Jones proposed to make a speech, but we did not ask him for the content of it. If people who take responsible jobs in public life were to have inhibitions of that sort put upon them, it would be highly improbable that they would take such jobs.

Have either the Government or the Board sorted out what is their policy towards increases in council house rents?

There are problems here. As the hon. Gentleman knows, councils have responsibilities also towards their rate funds, and so on, but it is a point which is being looked at closely.

As the Schedule which sets out the criteria which Mr. Jones has to take into account has been rendered completely obsolete by the Government's devaluation and the events leading up to it, has this question been discussed with Mr. Jones, and do the Government intend to amend the Schedule to the Act?

The Government have been discussing this vital question not only with Mr. Jones but with the C.B.I, and the T.U.C. Those discussions are by no means complete yet, but I assure the hon. Gentleman that we have the point in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on the future application of prices and incomes policy following the discussions with the Confederation of British Industry and the Trades Union Congress.

Discussions with the Confederation of British Industry and the Trades Union Congress have not been completed. My right hon. Friend will make a statement after the House resumes next month.

If movements of prices and incomes are not very carefully controlled, is there not great danger that the benefits of devaluation will be frittered away? What strengthened vetting arrangements have so far been applied to the large number of increases in trade prices already announced?

I thoroughly agree with the point which my hon. Friend makes. As I said in answer to another question, we are discussing this vital matter with the C.B.I, and the T.U.C. We are well aware of the importance of keeping prices down wherever possible. In the reply to which I referred a short time ago, we pointed out that there must be a large number of prices which are not even affected by devaluation and that such increases as are forced by devaluation should not necessarily aim at retaining the same margin as before.

Is the Chancellor of the Duchy discussing legislative proposals? Has he any proposals in this field for either new or amending legislation?

No, Sir. We have not discussed any change in legislative proposals. We have nothing of that sort in mind at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what additional staff are being recruited to strengthen the vetting procedures of the prices and incomes policy promised in the recent Letter of Intent to the International Monetary Fund.

The voluntary arrangements for notification and examination of proposed increases in prices and incomes are being reviewed: it is not possible to say at this stage whether any extra staff will be required.

Is it not obviously intolerable to expect anyone to believe that the T.U.C. vetting procedure can have any real significance upon the control of incomes in view of the policies of unions such as the A.E.U., which are perfectly justifiable, in my view? If the Government want credibility to be attached to the Letter of Intent, ought not they to give a demonstration of taking action themselves instead of off-loading the dirty work to other people?

It is difficult to understand what the hon. Gentleman wants the Government to do.

Nothing.

Good. The hon. Gentleman is frightfully concerned that we should not take any more legislative powers. He is terribly pessimistic about the powers of the T.U.C. and the C.B.I. It all seems to boil down to his wanting a market economy to take charge.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will make a statement on the work of the general planning group of his Department; what industries have been selected for detailed study; and how this work is related to the work of the economic development comittees.

The group is primarily concerned with medium-term forecasting and planning, both macroeconomic and in relation to major industries. There is close co-ordination between the group's work and that of the economic development committees.

Is it possible to use this study and research in order to draw up practical export promotion and import saving targets for industries? Second, could my hon. Friend help to bring trade unionists into discussions about such targets as a practical job which we need to do now?

The establishment of such targets might be useful, but if they were to be meaningful the industries concerned would have to be committed to them. This is one aspect of the problem which is being discussed in the economic development committees, where the trade unions are represented.

In order to help the country understand the Government's economic policy, will the Minister publish the assumptions on which these planners are working?

As the hon. Gentleman will know from a reply which the Prime Minister gave on 12th December, discussions are now going on with the N.E.D.C. about the prospect of a future plan. Although we cannot say when such a plan would be published, these discussions will include such assumptions as the hon. Gentleman mentions.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what is the present circulation of his Department's publication "Progress Report"; to whom it is sent and for what reasons; what is its current cost of publication and circulation; and whether he will change the title.

About 120,000; to people in industry, trade unions and the educational world on request only; to provide information on economic, industrial and regional topics; about £1,815 per issue; no, Sir.

What is the progress to which the title refers? Can the hon. Gentleman assure us that this is at least one of the sacred cows which will come under scrutiny in the review of public expenditure, on the understanding that there would be widespread assent on both sides of the House if it were axed?

If he has not already done so, the hon. Gentleman should read the publication, when he will find a considerable record of progress. There is at any rate a very good indication of its value in the fact that its circulation is nearly six times higher than the equivalent publication of the previous Government and is rising steadily. Hon. Members, who, I would have thought, are very good judges of its value, seem to be very interested in it.

asked the Postmaster-General for what purpose he limits the hours at which television transmissions can be made.

Under the agreed rules on hours of broadcasting I do not limit the hours at which television transmissions can be made; television programmes may be shown at any time provided that the rules on the number of hours of broadcasting are followed.

Should not the number of hours of broadcasting be limited by the judgment of the two authorities as to what is the public demand and their ability to fulfil it, rather than by the right hon. Gentleman setting himself up as the judge?

The hon. Gentleman has a very short memory. The powers of the Postmaster-General to control broadcasting were re-enacted in great detail by the party opposite when in office in the Television Act, 1963, and the B.B.C. Licence and Agreement of which the House approved in January, 1964.

Is it not quite clear that we are already getting enough rubbish on television without extending the time during which this rubbish is unloaded on a long-suffering public?

asked the Postmaster-General whether he will give a direction to the Independent Television Authority and the British Broadcasting Corporation that they should refrain from broadcasting party political broadcasts after 6 p.m.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are times in the peak viewing period when the great British public can hear nothing but the waffle of party political broadcasts with no alternative? Until such times as there are different times when these broadcasts go out, will the right hon. Gentleman make sure that they are not put over during the evening?

This has always been a matter for agreement between the major political parties and the broadcasting authorities.

Will my right hon. Friend initiate discussions between the major political parties with the idea of ensuring that party political broadcasts are put out on different channels at different times, so that the listener or viewer has an alternative programme if he wants it?

My right hon. Friend the Chief Whip is on the Front Bench at the moment and I have no doubt that he has taken the point. His opposite number is on the Front Bench opposite and no doubt he will take note or it, too.

asked the Postmaster-General if he is aware that telephones have now been removed from a number of British Railways stations, causing considerable inconvenience to travellers who require to contact their homes or call taxis; and what proposals he has to provide better facilities to enable passengers to complete their journeys.

Telephones inside stations are often freely available only to passengers. Where they are little used they are removed if there is a kiosk in the vicinity. It is open to British Railways to rent telephones for public use.

I appreciate that, but is not the hon. Gentleman aware of the genuine inconvenience to people who arrive at a wayside station where they cannot get a taxi and where there is no telephone? Would it not be possible for the Post Office to show some initiative and to help the railways in this matter by allowing them to put in telephones at special concessionary prices?

There is nothing to stop even British Railways from putting a telephone kiosk on a station platform if they so desire and think that it would be an advantage to passengers, but it cannot be always the responsibility of the Post Office to see about these things.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will issue a special stamp to mark the 800th century of the auld alliance between France and Scotland.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will issue a stamp to commemorate the 800th anniversary of the auld alliance.

No, Sir. I have already announced my special stamp programme for 1968. In any case, I am advised that not all Scottish historians regard the alliance as dating from 1168.

May I ask my right hon. Friend not to take his advice just from some historians? Is he not aware that, despite what he has said, that was a most disappointing answer to one who has always admired his approach to the issue of these special stamps? Will he not reconsider his answer as we are now in the season of giving, and could he not try to think of the Christmas spirit at this moment?

I have looked at a lot of spirits since seeing this Question. Both Mackie and Hume-Brown date the alliance from 1295 when John Balliol signed a treaty with the King of France against Edward I of England. However, at this season of good will I should like to hold out a compromise to my hon. Friend. If his friends wish it, I am quite willing to arrange for a special franking on letters to celebrate this alliance, provided that somebody in Scotland will pay for it.

On a point of order. Is there not a mistake in Question No. 38 as printed, or is my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Govan (Mr. Rankin) referring to some prehistoric alliance, some antediluvian alliance from 800 centuries ago?

It is an obvious misprint.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the two historians he has named are the only two to take that view and that other historians take the view that 1168 was indeed the year? In view of the Government's present difficulties with France, should not the right, hon. Gentleman be anxious to seek to emphasise one respect, albeit a historical one, in which the relationship is good? Would he not reconsider?

It is not for me to arbitrate between Scottish historians. I have said that I have looked at the opinions of a number of them and that there is no agreement. However, I have tried to meet this point of view half way by saying that I am willing to arrange franking.

On a point of order. Obviously the word "century" is the wrong word and ought not to be there. It is a misprint.

I thought that the House was aware of that.