asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will now introduce import controls to cut the flow into the country of imported consumer goods and to encourage their replacement by home-produced commodities.

There is no need, or justification, for imposing restrictions on trade which would damage our international trading relations and possibly our exports.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree, however, that bilateral quota agreements are acceptable to G.A.T.T., and that these have been applied successfully by the Japanese Government and, perhaps less successfully by ourselves in certain directions, such as the cotton industry? What steps are the Government taking to negotiate further defensive bilateral agreements of this type?

Although, of course, we must reduce the level of imports if we can, the best way to do this is to help our manufacturers to be more competitive and to take appropriate action to deal with unfair competition which may be directed against us. I am sure that what is needed is fewer restrictions on trade everywhere, so that we can increase our own share of world trade in fair competition.

But would the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that he has made a thoroughly up-to-date study of quotas in their various possible forms since devaluation?

We had a long examination of quotas before devaluation; the effects of devaluation in regard to those inquiries are now going on, of course.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will take steps to assist the balance of payments by introducing legislation to prevent the advertising on television and in the Press of imported consumer goods.

No, Sir. Such a ban would be arbitrary in effect, undesirable in principle and contrary to our international obligations.

In spite of that devastating reply, would my right hon. Friend not agree that it is farcical that there should be an 8 per cent. annual increase in expenditure on television advertising while the Government are, in theory, supposed to be trying to curb consumer demand? What steps do the Government intend to take to try to cut down this advertising?

That is another question, and one which I think is well worth considering.

Are the Government trying to curb consumer demand?

I think that we have that intention in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will establish a toy council.

My right hon. Friend could use his power to establish a Development Council for an industry only if he was satisfied that the industry wants one. We have no evidence that this is so in the case of the toy industry.

Would not my hon. Friend—who has considerable personal experience in these matters—not agree that toys are very important in a child's formative years? In view of the concern of people in education and other spheres who want this toy council, will she look at this again?

We are, of course, aware of the great importance of the kind of toys with which a child plays initially, but unfortunately, under the relevant powers, the sort of organisation which the Consumer Council has in mind would not be possible.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations he has had with other members of the European Free Trade Association regarding the control of textile imports from Portugal.

None, Sir.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the very considerable concern in the hosiery and knitwear industries in the East Midlands about the increasing rate of Portuguese imports, particularly in view of the very low wages paid in the Portuguese industry? Will he not discuss the matter either with our friends in E.F.T.A. or directly with the Portuguese Government?

The only machinery for discussing the matter with our friends in E.F.T.A. is under Article 20. The criteria laid down there are extremely stringent, and no one has yet thought it worthwhile to raise them. In the case of the hosiery and knitwear industry, the percentage of imports is small compared with total production.

But does not the textile industry have legitimate ground for complaint, in that the Government promised legislation to implement the anti-dumping procedures agreed in the Kennedy Round? When will we see this?

I understand that that Bill will be before the House shortly.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that important trading inter- ests all across the E.F.T.A. countries feel strongly that there are inbuilt subsidies in these imports into this and other countries, due probably to the supply of raw materials from Africa and a hidden subsidy in Portugal? Is it not about time we looked at this with a very fine tooth comb?

I know that that belief is fairly widely shared with or without my hon. Friend's mixed metaphor—but, although we have made all the investigations which we possibly can, we can find no proof.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the Norwegian representations concerning the development of an aluminium smelter industry in Great Britain; and what reply he has sent.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the nature of the representations which have been made by other members of the European Free Trade Association concerning plans for the construction of aluminium smelters in development areas; and what reply he will make.

When they met on 24th January, the Norwegian Minister of Commerce and Shipping told my right hon. Friend that he regarded the Government aid involved in the development of such an industry as contrary to the E.F.T.A. Convention. My right hon. Friend explained why Her Majesty's Government took the contrary view. The Norwegian Minister has since announced that his Government will raise this question in the E.F.T.A. Council.

As well as being contrary to the E.F.T.A. Convention, is not the proposed development also contrary to the spirit of E.F.T.A.? Would it not be cheaper for this country to import the aluminium from Norway, and will a decision not be taken until the E.F.T.A. Council has met and discussed the matter in May?

As to the first point, it certainly would not be to the advantage of this country not to proceed with the proposals for the smelters. The benefits which will accrue to us are very great indeed. On the second point, I do not think that the proposals that have so far been made are contrary even to the spirit of the E.F.T.A. Convention. Thirdly, it is now a question of timing, but I think it very unlikely that any decision will be taken before the E F.T.A. Council has met.

Can my right hon. Friend confirm that the Coal Board is already supplying to the electricity boards coal at prices which are now being offered to the proposed aluminium smelter development, and that, in that sense, there cannot be any element of subsidy at all?

The objections of the Norwegians are not aimed so much at electricity costs as at the investment grants that would be involved in building the smelters in development areas, but w reject the argument that the investment grants will be contrary to the E F.T.A. Convention.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many persons are employed by his Department in work on the investment grants scheme; what total remuneration is payable to them; what is the cost of accommodation required to administer the grants scheme; and whether he will estimate the cost to industry and the accounting profession of the presentation of grant claims and of dealing with correspondence with the Board of Trade.

Eleven hundred staff are employed at a cost of about £1¼ million, which is about 1½ per cent. of the payments to industry. The investment grants offices cost just under £¼ million. The cost to industry and the accounting profession of handling claims is impossible to estimate, but I would not expect it to add greatly to the cost of other essential work on financial control, auditing and taxation.

Does the Minister really mean what he has just said? Does he not realise that industry is finding the scheme a very heavy burden, and that the accountancy profession objects to it? Will he make representations to his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Ex- chequer to put this nonsense right in the next Budget?

We have no evidence at all that this, in itself, is placing a burden on the accountancy profession. In fact, had we not made any changes at al from the investment allowance to the investment grant system there would still have been a burden on the accountancy profession because of the growth of industry, trade, and so on. We have no evidence at all that the accountancy profession has made the kind of observation that the hon. Member alleges. In fact, we have constant consultation with the accountancy professional bodies, and they are satisfied that the investment grant scheme is working satisfactorily.

Will the right hon. Gentleman recollect certain criticisms of the scheme that I, for one, in the profession put to him during the passage of the Bill? Will he not now, as a result of his experience, accept that it was a serious mistake ever to get rid of investment allowances?

I do not want to go over the arguments about investment allowances, except to say that I thoroughly disagree with the hon. Gentleman. I also recollect certain things that I said in Committee. For instance, I estimated that we would employ about 1,100 people —we are doing so. I estimated that the cost would be £2 million—it is £1½ million. And I can tell him that, out of experience, we are now proposing to reduce the staff and save another £40,000 because the system is working so satisfactorily.

Will the right hon. Gentleman recollect what I said in Standing Committee—[Interruption]—when I warned the Government that a scheme which would involve the handing out of large sums of money would require the most meticulous administration to prevent fraud? Does he realise that this means getting in touch with accountants who have signed certificates in order to verify that they have, in fact, signed them?

The latter part of the hon. Gentleman's statement is incorrect. We intended from the beginning—and the hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Mr. Michael Shaw), who is in the profession, will agree here—to check the figures with the accountants. As for fraud, I am quite sure that the system we are working, which is very efficient, will prevent any fraud at all.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he now proposes to take to assist the chipboard industry to replace materials at present imported.

Devaluation should assist the chipboard industry and, from discussions my Department have had, I know that the industry is well aware of the opportunities now presented. All the forms of assistance offered by the Government to industrialists are, of course, available to the chipboard industry.

Would not the best action be to control the dumping of chipboard from Eastern European countries? Will the right hon. Gentleman particularly bear in mind that, in the present crisis in the Scottish timber industry in disposing of storm-blown timber, such a step would be an enormous help to the industry?

We could well look at the suggestion in the second part of the hon. Member's supplementary question. As to the first part, we have no evidence that chipboard that is coming from Eastern European countries is, in fact, being dumped, in the technical sense, and we have asked the industry whether it can supply us with information that would prove that chipboard is being dumped.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, what representation he has had regarding the dumping of alarum clocks in the United Kingdom; and what reply he has sent.

The British Clock and Watch Manufacturers' Association has complained that alarm clocks from Eastern area countries are being sold at unduly low prices with damaging effects on the British industry. The complaint was made to the Ministry of Technology and is under investigation by that Department and the Board of Trade.

Is the hon. Lady aware that it is alleged that these clocks are coming into this country at a third of the cost of production? Will she bear in mind that the majority home production of the clocks is in Scotland and that unless action is taken there may be serious repercussions in Scotland?

The hon. Member will be aware that we are seeking extra powers to amend the anti-dumping Act in order to investigate this kind of thing.

Is my hon. Friend aware that when my hon. Friend the Member for Motherwell (Mr. Lawson) and I made repeated representations to the Board of Trade and previous Ministers there about this matter a considerable time ago we were promised that something would be done and that a full investigation would be made? May we have some information about that now?

My hon. Friend will be aware that in 1963 there was an application for action against dumped alarm clocks and the Board of Trade then found that there was not sufficient evidence of material injury or threat of injury to the industry established in that instance.

Is my hon. Friend aware that these alarm clocks are made exclusively in my constituency and the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Dunbartonshire, West (Mr. Steele)? We were given assurances that the Board of Trade itself would investigate thoroughly these complaints and would not leave it entirely to the trade. Are we to take it that nothing happened in this connection?

There has been an investigation into the effects of alleged dumping. We shall certainly bear very much in mind the views of my hon. Friend.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is satisfied that investment grants paid to firms leasing computers have reduced the charges they make for their use; and if he will make a statement.

The availability of investment grants is only one factor in determining charges for leased computers, but I have no reason to suppose that in this competitive field the benefit of investment grant is not being passed on to lessees.

Since the object of the grant is to encourage the use of computers, is it not essential that the benefit should be passed on to the user? Will the right. hon. Gentleman look at this further to see that this is set out in the actual leasing agreements?

The best thing is to look at this if the hon. Member has evidence to show that the benefit is not being passed on. We will look at specific cases, but, so far as our inquiries go in this matter, we understand that the advantages in investment grants go to the lessee.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether Her Majesty's Government will now reconsider their policy of discriminating against service industries and in favour of manufacturing.

If the hon. and learned Member is referring to investment grants and the Selective Employment Tax, no change in the Government's general policy in this respect is contemplated.

Now that the aim of the Selective Employment Tax to encourage manufacturing as opposed to service industries has proved to be a complete failure, when are we to get rid of this disastrous tax?

I certainly would not agree with the hon. Member's views. Employment in the service trades is bound to go on increasing as living standards rise and people want more and more services of one kind and another. What we have tried to do, and have succeeded to some extent in doing, is to check the excessive expansion of service industries which has gone on for many years at the expense of manufacturing industry.

Is not the Report of the Bland Committee on Overseas Earnings, on invisibles, a standing condemnation of the Government's policy in this regard? Why do the Government continue to regard as an export only something you can drop on your toes?

There is a Question on this subject later on the Order Paper.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman must realise that since S.E.T. has been in operation, although its main purpose was to switch people from service industry to manufacturing industry, there are now 300,000 fewer employed in the manufacturing industries and the effect has been the exact opposite? This is what hour after hour, day after day, in Committee, we said would happen.

Whatever the figures the hon. Member has, I am certain that they do not support the argument he is trying to put forward.

Recognising that responsibility for taxation rests with the Chancellor of the Exchequer, is it not surely the job of the right hon. Gentleman to make representations in the interests of trade and industry to the Chancellor? Is it not abundantly clear that this iniquitous tax, instead of sending people from service to manufacturing industries, is working the other way and that the numbers are declining in manufacturing industry and increasing in the service industries and the Civil Service?

The intention was not to drive anyone out of anywhere—[HON. MEMBERS: "You said so."]—no, but to check the great increase year by year of those going into the service industries. What I think the hon. Member does not realise is that over a period of years of every 100 new jobs created in this country over 80 were in service industries and it is the manufacturing industries which are short of manufacturing workers.

Will my right hon. Friend ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give further consideration to this tax because of the seeming misunderstanding about its purpose? I understood that its purpose was to help the export industry by giving it a hidden subsidy and all this nonsense about getting people out of service industries into manufacturing industry is totally wrong. Will my right hon. Friend give consideration to repeal of the tax because I do not think it serves the purpose for which it was introduced?

I am quite sure that no one has ever suggested that the purpose of the tax was to give a hidden subsidy to anybody. As to the first part of my hon. Friend's question, I shall see that the views he has expressed are conveyed to the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I will raise the matter again.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress he is making in attracting industry to areas of pit closure in Scotland.

Since the beginning of 1965, 63 firms have decided to set up factories in the Scottish coalfield areas and at present employ some 1,140 men. About 12,600 more new jobs for men are expected to be created when these factories are fully manned, and from expansions now planned by firms already in these areas. Additional new jobs will be created in 19 advance factories yet to be allocated in these areas and my right hon. Friend will continue to use his powers to encourage further developments.

is the hon. Lady aware that as the latest round of pit closures rapidly approaches there seems to be little sign of industry coming to the new advance factories? Will she make this her top priority?

Certainly we are very anxious about the whole problem of the creation of employment, but the hon. Member will be aware that we are wing the special development areas particularly to deal with some of these problems.

What progress is being made in investigation into the possibility of selling the coal now in stock at reduced prices as an additional inducement to industry to come to these areas?

I think that that question is for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Power, but we are obviously interested in helping in any way we can.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the Regional Employment Premium and the Selective Employment Tax, utilised properly, can be of great advantage in these areas? Can she see that this kind of thing continues?

I shall certainly take note of what my hon. Friend has said.

Would the hon. Lady agree that about a score of advance factories are already standing idle in Scotland? What is the point of adding to advance factories so long as Government policies make it impossible to fill those which are already there?

We are determined that when the upturn in the economy comes—[HON. MEMBERS: "When?"]—we shall have advance factories available in order to be able to provide accommodation for industry.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware of the damage caused to British commodity markets by devaluation; what steps he proposes to take to minimise the damage; and if he will make a statement.

I fully appreciate the foreign exchange earnings of the commodity markets, but as my right hon. Friend the Chancellor has said, the Government cannot accept liability to compensate traders who will sustain losses because they bought forward in local sterling area currencies for onward sale in sterling. I understand, however, that the Bank of England's offer of loans of up to £5 million at a favourable rate of interest still stands.

What estimate has the Minister made of the total loss incurred by the market? In view of the importance the market has for invisible earnings, may I ask whether he will tell the House to what extent the offer made by the Bank of England is likely to cover this loss?

Offhand I cannot give the figures the hon. Member wants, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer has discussed these problems fully with the trading interests concerned and I am quite sure that calculations have been made at the Treasury about the costs that have been incurred and the needs of the trading interests.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that in 1966 over half of all visitors to Great Britain stayed in London and nowhere else; and what action he will take to encourage such visitors to spend more time outside London.

The British Travel Association promotes the attractions of all parts of the United Kingdom in its overseas advertising.

Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that outside London the rates of return in this industry are very low and that, given help, this industry is able to make a valuable contribution to regional development?

The industry is certainly able to make a valuable contribution not only to regional development, but to our balance of payments. It is a most important industry. We are considering what help we can give.

Will my hon. Friend consult my right hon. Friend the "Minister for the Arts" with a view to ensuring that a greater proportion of grants goes to provincial cities so as to make them more attractive, not only to foreign visitors, but also to the people who live and work in them?

I am all for that. I will have a word with my right hon. Friend.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the rate of growth of earnings from overseas visitors to Great Britain in the years since 1959; and how this compares with the rate of growth of other West European countries, available to him from international sources.

About 6 per cent. per annum between 1959 and 1966, which is less than for most other West European countries, though United Kingdom earnings were the fifth highest in absolute terms. As the Answer contains a number of figures I shall, with permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Can he estimate the adverse effect on the British holiday trade of the travel tax recently announced by the United States Government? Is not regrettable that, by the introduction of their £50 travel allowance limit, Her Majesty's Government have set the example for this sort of restrictive activity and are we not likely to be hurt by it more than we are helped?

The restriction on the travel allowance was not something which one would do if one could avoid it. It was forced on us as one of the measures to correct the balance of payments.

As to the United States restrictions, we still do not know what they will be and when, if ever, they will be applied, so that it is not easy to make a forecast of their effect on tourism from that country.

Will the hon. Gentleman understand that the health of the tourist industry is closely bound up with the health of the aviation industry? We cannot expect tourists to fly here if there is no hotel for them to stay in.

I have that point very much in mind.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in the Common Market countries in particular the cost of living is very high, so that there is great scope for the tourist trade in this country if his Department would advertise energetically throughout the Common Market countries for their citizens to come here for holidays?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend. The British Travel Association has during the past year conducted a special campaign to advertise abroad the advantages of holidaying in this country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now announce the result of his re-examination of the hotel loans scheme.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now state the result of his consideration of the recommendations for encouraging investment in the hotel industry submitted by the Economic Development Committee for Hotels and Catering.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will now take steps to provide investment grants for the hotel and catering industries.

The Government are examining the case for further assistance for the hotel industry and will announce their conclusions as soon as practicable.

Does the hon. Gentleman feel able to give us a more specific assurance as to when the announcement will take place? Does he intend to implement the suggestions of the little N.E.D.C., first, that it should not be obligatory for the hotel industry to satisfy overseas requirements before it can obtain grants, and, secondly, that there should be moratorium for the first three years before the repayment of grants?

These considerations have been very much in our minds, but I will not anticipate the statement. I hope very much that my right hon. Friend will be able to make an announcement before the end of March.

Is the Minister of State aware that the little N.E.D.C. Report itself refers to the need for very rapid action so that the foreign exchange potential of the industry can be realised? Will he bear in mind, when the announcement is made, the vital point made in the Report that the rate of return on investment at present is too low?

Yes, I have that very much in mind, and also the need for urgency.

Is my hon. Friend aware that, in the opinion of many travellers, particularly travellers in Europe, British hotel charges are the highest in Europe at present? In considering the injection of further Government money into the hotel industry, which I do not resist, will my hon. Friend ensure that steps are taken to protect the consumer so that he enjoys some of the benefit of the Government money which it is proposed to put into the industry?

I do not accept that British hotel charges are the highest in Europe.

Does the Minister of State realise that in Wales the tourist industry, which is a valuable part of industry in Wales, would do much better if there were a return to the system of investment allowances and an abolition of the Selecive Employment Tax?

That is another question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proposals he has for further legislation in the field of company law; and when they will be laid before the House for consideration.

We hope, later in this Parliament, to propose legislation to deal with the Jenkins Committee's recommendations which were not dealt with in last year's Companies Act, and will consider other proposals.

As Jenkins is now five years old and there has been no general implementation of the Report, is the right hon. Gentleman saying that in this Parliament we shall have a new Companies Act? Can we have some action?

Yes, Sir. We propose and hope to introduce the legislation in this Parliament. As for the Jenkins Committee's Report being somewhat out of date, as it is in some respects, we are constantly in consultation with the appropriate bodies to see what additional recommendations would have been made if we had a Jenkins Committee at the present time, as it were.

Will my right hon. Friend express support for the proposal to abolish the principle of limited liability so that, when the new companies law is introduced, the shareholder will have to do something for his money?

That is a proposal which we have not considered, and I doubt very much whether we shall consider it.

Is the Advisory Committee which has just been reconstituted being used merely to advise on the provisions of the present legislation or to give advice on proposed new legislation?

It deals with the operation of the existing legislation and is not advisory on future legislation.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind when considering new legislation the desirability of taking account of developments in European company law with a view to aligning, so far as possible, British and continental law?

We certainly have this very much in mind. Not for the legislation which I have already been talking about, but obviously for any subsequent legislation, the possibility of harmonising certain company law, not only in Europe. but on a much wider basis, will have to be taken into consideration.

Will the right hon. Gentleman take note that one of the principal subjects still to be covered which was in the Jenkins Report, namely, the establishment of a code for takeover bids, is already being dealt with effectively by the City of London? Does the right hon. Gentleman recognise that there may be advantages in leaving this as a voluntary system of control rather than introducing rigid statutory provisions in an Act of Parliament?

As the hon. Gentleman will know, we are in consultation with the Bank of England and the Stock Exchange about the voluntary system. One of the questions which is bound to arise is whether the operators of the voluntary system would like some kind of sanction behind what they wish to do. This is one of the issues that we are now discussing and considering.

Will my right hon. Friend recall certain discussions which took place on the last Companies Act? Can he confirm that the next one will contain provisions for industrial democracy and for workers to share in the profits and capital appreciation of companies?

I cannot give any guarantee that it will be in the next legislation, but, as I said in my previous reply, we are considering other proposals.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give an assurance that the Overseas Marketing Corporation Limited will have no privileges relating to official information, credit insurance or finance, which are not equally available to other export houses.

My right hon. Friend announced in the House on 2nd November, 1967, the extent of the Government's financial assistance to Overseas Marketing Corporation Limited. Apart from this, the Corporation will be eligible to receive the full range of the Government's services on the same basis as every other exporter, but will receive no special privileges.—[Vol. 753, c. 11–13.]

Is the hon. Lady aware that that reply will come as a reassurance to the very important sector of the British export houses which already do over £1,000 million of export business, earning in the course of it over £40 million in invisible earnings?

I am well aware of the efforts made by many export houses, but the purpose of the Corporation was that it should fill any gaps that might exist.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made by the working party considering exclusion clauses in guarantees; and if he will make a statement.

It is hoped that an interim report will be submitted later this year.

As this matter has now been under discussion at least since the Molony Report of 1962, can the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will bring forward the necessary legislation very soon indeed without waiting for an interim report?

It is true that the Molony Committee made recommendations, but nothing had been done about the matter until we took over and appointed the Law Commissions and the working party. I have good reason to believe that the working party will have done a pretty good job on this. The time at which we introduce legislation to carry out any recommendations is a matter for further consideration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what action he is taking to encourage exporters to take full advantage of the opportunities provided by devaluation.

Ministers and officials take every opportunity to bring home to exporters the potential advantages resulting from devaluation through public speeches and meetings, public and private, with organisations representative of industry and commerce. trade associations and individual firms. The B.N.E.C. and its area committees have also been active and my right hon. Friend is particularly grateful to them for the series of Action '68 Conferences which they organised last month in various parts of the country. Hon. Members may have noticed that recent advertisements for Board of Trade services to exporters have emphasised the opportunities for greater volume and higher profits as a result of devaluation.

I appreciate what successive Governments have done in this respect. Will the hon. Lady never rest content but particularly try to simplify the paper work involved at all stages of exporting, including Customs procedures?

We in the Department are well aware of the difficulties that can arise and are doing everything we can to assist.

Does the hon. Lady recognise that business men, whether they are selling abroad or at home, are engaged in the most legitimate practice when they try to maximise the profitable return on the assets with which they are entrusted? Will she therefore give an undertaking that the Government will regard profits in a favourable light?

The Government are very anxious that business men shall profit from their sales abroad.

What has the Department done to exhort commercial attaches abroad to help increase our exports as a result of devaluation?

I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that commercial attaches abroad are very helpful to any exporter and they do everything they can to assist.

To what extent have English manufacturers not been able to pass on the full benefit of devaluation in their prices because of previous tight margins and the increasing costs with which they are having to contend?

Obviously, there has been a difference between industries in the extent to which devaluation has been of assistance, but I still feel that there is a margin which will be of great assistance to them in overseas markets.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is his estimate of the effect of the Selective Employment Tax on the catering industry and the hotel industry, respectively.

It has been estimated that, for the hotel industry, Selective Employment Tax represents about 2½per cent. of turnover; for the other catering industries, the figure is about 1 per cent. It is too early to assess the effects on these industries.

Why have not the Government made a further investigation into its effects, as it is clear that the Selective Employment Tax has failed to do what the Government expected in moving jobs from service to manufacturing industries? Is it not time that they altogether reconsidered this ill-advised tax?

An investigation has just been completed by Cooper Brothers, and it will be published on 14th February.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the Selective Employment Tax has had a real and harmful effect on the tourist industry in the South-West, and will he urge his right hon. Friends to do away with it as quickly as possible in the interests of the tourist industry?

We are prepared to do anything in the interests of the tourist industry, but I am not satisfied that the Selective Employment Tax has had an adverse effect.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that, as part of the examination of this whole problem to which he has referred, he will look at the special problems of the catering and hotel industries in development areas with high and persistent rates of unemployment?

Yes, Sir, most certainly.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many advance factories have been completed since October, 1964; and how many advance factories were unoccupied on 30th November, 1967.

Eighty-eight Board of Trade advance factories have been completed since October, 1964; 36, of which 22 had been completed since July, 1967, were unoccupied on 30th November, 1967, but three of these had been allocated.

What reason does the hon. Lady give for the delay in letting so many of these advance factories?

All advance factories are shown to as many industrialists as are anxious to see new factory accommodation, but it has been difficult for us to obtain tenants in all of them.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many advance factories have been let since October, 1964; and how many people are now working in them.

Since October, 1964, 55 advance factories have been let, and a further six sold or expected to be sold. About 4,000 people are employed in these factories.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to improve relations between Her Majesty's Government and industry.

Her Majesty's Government wish to maintain the closest possible relations both with industry generally and with particular firms and industries and will continue to consult them to the maximum practicable extent on all relevant issues of Government policy.

As well as that, will the right hon. Gentleman urge the Chancellor of the Exchequer to do something positive to encourage industry, even if it is only a token this year, in his forthcoming Budget?

That question ought to be addressed to my right hon. Friend, but I shall pass it on.

In view of the grave anxiety now felt in the engineering industry in Greater London, ought not my right hon. Friend to call a conference between the trade unions and the employers involved to see whether a planned procedure could be organised in an effort to allay some of the distress which is already being felt in many trade union organisations as well as employers' organisations in engineering in Greater London?

That is a different question, but I agree with my hon. Friend that the greatest possible consultation is needed between firms which are in process of rationalising their factories and the trade unions, and as much advance information as possible of the changes proposed should be given to the appropriate Government Departments so that a proper phased operation could apply in practically every case.

Is it not a fact that, contrary to the high hopes which many industrialists—mistakenly, as it turned out—placed in Her Majesty's present Government, the disillusion which so many industrialists are now feeling is, perhaps, the greatest condemnation of the Government's performance?

I do not agree with a single word which the hon. Gentle has said. I can tell him that a great many industrialists, from big, medium and small firms and trade associations, have told me that they have had closer and more regular contacts with the Board of Trade during the past three years than they ever had in any similar period under the previous Administration.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why, following the registration of Compton Pipe Organs Limited in 1964, he permitted the registration of the name of Compton Organs Limited in June, 1967.

Because the Board of Trade did not consider the name undesirable.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that, because of a mistake in his Department, it was possible for an advertisement to appear in the Musical Times of December last advertising Rushworth & Dreaper Ltd. "incorporating Compton Pipe Organs Ltd.", while on the opposite page there was an advertisement for Compton Organs Ltd? Will he take powers to rectify such mistakes when they are made?

I agree that the advertisements appear to prove the hon. Gentleman's point, but, given the facts of the case, the two companies having decided which should make which type of organ, I should have come to the same decision as the Registrar did. However, we cannot resolve this problem at Question Time, so I repeat the invitation which I sent to the hon. Gentleman to discuss the matter with me to see whether we can do something about it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will make a statement on the action taken by Her Majesty's Government to mark the observance of 1967 as International Tourist Year.

The Government supported International Tourist Year through the British Travel Association, which took special measures to mark the occasion.

As the Government supported the concept of the International Tourist Year, will they now make a major contribution by relieving international tourism on three points—first, the £50 travel allowance; second, restoring investment allowances or grants; and, third, abolishing the Selective Employment Tax?

All three matters have already been dealt with in other Questions.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how much public money was spent each year, respectively, since 1961 on promoting British Week trade fairs overseas; and what is the result of his studies as to the cost effectiveness of the outlay.

I refer the hon. Member to the figures which my right hon. Friend gave in answer to his question on 22nd November, 1967. We have not yet received all the information about the results of last autumn's Weeks in Brussels and Toronto required for a full review of the effectiveness of British Weeks. but we expect to have it soon.—[Vol. 754, c. 1289–91.]

Does the hon. Lady expect to carry on the British Fairs unabated following devaluation, or is there to be an intensification or a drop in the amount of money spent on them'?

It is our intention to do everything we can to assist in securing more export sales, and British Weeks, until they are proved otherwise, are doing a great job in this way.

In evaluating the results of the trade fairs does the Department take into account not only the sales at a fair but the repercussions throughout industry in the months that follow?

It certainly does, and for many months after that.

Will the Government support the British Trade Fair at Sao Paolo in 1969?

I should like to give the hon. Gentleman some information on that later.

Why have there been no British trade fairs in Latin America?

I shall be delighted to write to my hon. Friend as well.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he has held, since devaluation, with the management of British Overseas Airways Corporation regarding their proposed purchases of aircraft from the United States of America.

The Board of Trade has been in close touch with B.O.A.C. and is satisfied that devaluation has not weakened the case for the five additional U.S. aircraft which B.O.A.C. proposes to buy.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the growth of air traffic in Britain is sufficiently rapid to warrant the purchase of United States jumbo jets? Is he also satisfied that there is a reasonable prospect of them operating at a profit?

Yes, Sir. So far as one can possibly forecast, I think that is so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent the views of British European Airways have been taken into account in making his decision on the British European Airways re-equipment programme.

The views of B.E.A. have been taken fully into account, but the Government have also to have regard to wider national considerations.

Can the hon. Gentleman indicate, first, what progress has been made in deciding how many Tridents B.E.A. will order; secondly, what progress has been made in negotiating the compensation promised to B.E.A. for being forced to order a plane not of its choice?

To answer the latter part about negotiations on compensation, that will, in part, depend on the actual order that B.E.A. decides to place; but we have come to an agreement on the principle of how the compensation should be worked out. To answer the first part, the B.E.A. Board is almost daily working out what it considers will be the best action.

Will my hon. Friend confirm that the original wish of B.E.A. was to order an American aircraft, the Boeing 727 200, and that devaluation has made the Trident 3B an extremely attractive and competitive aeroplane?

That is so.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what estimate he has made of the effect which the delay in deciding upon the aircraft re-equipment programme of British European Airways will have on that airline's competitive position over the next five years.

B.E.A. has not yet decided on its remaining fleet requirement, but I have no reason to think that, in terms of comfort and service to the public, B.E.A. will be in any way uncompetitive in the next five years.

In that case, can the Minister explain how an airline can possibly be competitive if it has no competitive aircraft?

As I said, in terms of comfort and service, this aircraft, which I hope B.E.A. will order, will be competitive.

In view of the fact that Hawker Siddeley, which is soon to cease making Buccaneers at its plant near Hull—which means that 1,000 men will be unemployed there—

Whose fault is that?

—will my hon. Friend please see the firm and expedite the decision about ordering the Hawker Siddeley 147-seater Trident?

This decision is a matter for the B.E.A. Board, which, I hope, will shortly come to a conclusion.

Will the hon. Gentleman also bear in mind the fact that every day that is delayed adds to the ultimate cost which is out of all proportion to the benefit that may be gained; in other words, delay can make an uncompetitive aircraft even more uncompetitive?

This is a consideration which B.E.A. has in mind.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many aircraft of American manufacture are currently on order by British airlines; and what increase in the cost of these has resulted from devaluation.

Including orders by independent airlines, in regard to which information may be incomplete, 15 such aircraft are actually on order, at an estimated increased cost of £13 million after devaluation.

Does not this highlight the absurdity of excluding all aircraft from investment grants and, in view of the crucial importance to the economy of modern forms of transport, is it not about time that the Board of Trade reviewed this whole question?

I will certainly ask my right hon. Friend to consider that.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why he has decided to direct the Air Transport Licensing Board to refuse applications by private carriers for transatlantic services.

My right hon. Friend has done so only in respect of those applications, or parts of applications, which would have involved the negotiation with other Governments of traffic rights which it would be inexpedient for the time being to seek. Six applications are now before the Air Transport Licensing Board.

Is not the Minister aware that the British share of air transatlantic traffic has been steadily declining and that this regrettable decision will make it virtually certain that this decline will continue? Is he aware that this decision may have a bad effect on Prestwick airport, where there is no congestion and where there is urgent need to increase traffic?

I am not sure to which decision the hon. Gentleman is referring. My right hon. Friend took action and I really do not want to discuss the weaknesses and strengths of our bargaining position on particular routes. Other applications are before the Air Transport Licensing Board, including one for traffic from Prestwick.

Can the hon. Gentleman give some idea of the criteria which are adopted in deciding that it is not expedient to make applications to these overseas Governments?

It is really a question of what will be the balance of advantage to this country's civil aviation. If, in asking for a particular traffic route, we consider that it would mean giving away another traffic route which we consider to be more valuable, then we would not do it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress has been made with the facilities needed at British airports to handle jumbo jets and other very large aircraft.

I understand that the authorities concerned at the airports likely to be used by these aircraft are providing the facilities necessary to handle both the aircraft and the large numbers of passengers they will carry.

Is the Minister aware of the advantages of being able to operate directly from a number of different airports within a country? Will the Government make sure that all of our leading airports have the facilities which will allow them to fly direct to America?