asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he approved the campaign inaugurated by the North-East Development Council to attract Yorkshire firms to the North-East Development Area.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he is aware that Government aid is being used as an inducement to attract industrial development away from the West Riding, where diversification is urgently required; and if he will take steps to discourage such movements until after the publication of the Hunt Committee Report.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what financial and other assistance his Department gives to the North-East Development Council.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will give an assurance that it remains the policy of Her Majesty's Government to encourage expansion in the North-East and other development areas, in view of the availability of labour and sites there, to which their attention has been drawn by the North-East Development Council.

I would refer my hon. Friends to the Answer I gave to similar Questions on 16th and 17th May.—[Vol. 764, c. 271, 301.]

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his reply was well received in Yorkshire and Humberside? But will he take all possible steps, along with his right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade and other Ministers, to ensure that nothing further is done to aggravate the situation which results in unfair competition from development areas on areas such as Yorkshire and Humberside? Will he further give an undertaking that speedy action will be taken as soon as the Hunt Committee reports?

Order. Long questions mean fewer questions.

I thank my hon. Friend for his opening remarks. He will be aware that we have urged upon Sir Joseph Hunt the need to report as quickly as possible on the matters which have been put to the Committee. I hope to receive this Report in the autumn. My hon. Friend will also be aware that I deprecate any unnecessary rivalry and competition between the regions.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that the North-East Development Council will not in any way be penalised in its efforts towards solving the chronic unemployment problems of the development areas in the North-East?

I fully understand the difficulties facing the Northern Region and, indeed, the concern of the Development Council for its prospects. I assure my hon. Friend that I have no intention of penalising them in any way.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that the overall figures for wholly unemployed, seasonably adjusted, published today continue to show an increase, and does this give him cause for concern? Can he tell us how the overall figures compare with those for the intermediate areas?

There has been an increase in regional unemployment figures in the North, as announced today. This is a slight increase over last month. It is too soon to draw any firm conclusions about the trend of unemloyment generally, not only in the regions, but in the country as a whole.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the North-East Development Council's campaign was confined strictly to localities where there is a very low unemployment rate? Will he bear in mind that the need for jobs in the North is 10 times greater than in those areas?

I am aware, and it is my job to be aware, of the needs of both regions. I have to try to find a proper balance between the two.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs by what percentage public expenditure on the National Economic Development Office and its Council is expected to increase during the current year.

About twenty-three per cent.

Does this quite extraordinary increase of 23 per cent. indicate that the National Economic Development Office is to be used by the Government during the coming year to engage on the highly dubious exercise of producing some kind of national plan?

I would point out to the hon. Gentleman that it is the lowest annual increase since the office was set up. It also reflects the fact that since we came into office the number of E.D.C.s has been expanded to 21 from a pitiful nine when hon. Gentlemen opposite were in charge.

Will the Under-Secretary of State look again at the work of the E.D.C.s—for example, the clothing E.D.C. —which issues lengthy league tables which are quite meaningless and are made even more meaningless because they are issued 18 months to two years out of date? Will my hon. Friend have a word with them to see if they can do some useful work other than this?

The work of the E.D.C.s is continually reviewed. There is a great deal of new research under way at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what reductions he has made in the staff of his Department as the result of the transfer of responsibility for incomes policy from him; and by how much the cost of his Department in 1968–69 will as a result of this transfer be reduced below the cost in 1967–68.

About 35 staff of the Department of Economic Affairs employed on prices and incomes policy have been transferred to the Department of Employment and Productivity and the cost of the Department will be reduced by about £100,000. Further details will be shown in the revised estimate which will be presented to Parliament in due course.

Does the right hon. Gentleman recall telling me only a few weeks ago that the increased cost of £500,000, or about a sixth of the cost of his Department in the coming year, was due to its increased responsibilities for the incomes policy? Now that, happily, he has been relieved of that responsibility, why does he not reduce the staff of his Department to the level appropriate to its real status—that of a subordinate division of the Treasury?

I think that the right hon. Gentleman may be confusing the figures given previously for the Department of Economic Affairs and the figures for the Prices and Incomes Board, which are quite separate.

Has my right hon. Friend considered any attempt to reduce the number of his staff by having business consultants inside his Ministry to ensure that every bit of work that is done is done in an efficient manner?

I thank my hon. Friend for his interest in the efficiency of the Department. This is a proper concern in all Government Departments, but my Department is one of the smaller Government Departments with a staff of just over 550.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what information he has about the effect of present Government policies on the expansion of existing industries in the North-West of England outside development areas; and if he will make a statement.

Given the extremely liberal and flexible I.D.C. policy being pursued there a substantial expansion of existing industry is continuing. The longer-term problems of the area are being examined by the Hunt Committee.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this area neighbours two development areas which are liable to draw any possible expansion from this area? Will he at least make sure that the advertisements which have so troubled Yorkshire and Humberside will not also trouble North-East Lancashire, which is in much the same position?

I am sure that the needs and particular problems of North-East Lancashire are known to the development councils. I am glad to say that there is considerable evidence of an increase in the number of I.D.C.s approved last year and the beginning of this year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider giving the House more information about the number of cases where firms have either left the area for development areas or have shut down altogether?

I have been attempting to get information on this point, which I know is of great concern. Concerning the North-West Region, outside the greater Manchester area we have evidence of only four firms which have moved from the non-development area to the development area. Obviously we will be watching this trend.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in the textile industry the new textile factories which would normally have been built in the non-development cotton areas are being set up in development areas outside the region?

I am aware of one very important example of this trend, but I have not had evidence that this is a significant development.

The Minister mentions "this trend". Is this trend not likely to be severely accentuated by the withdrawal of the S.E.T. refund and by the 50 per cent. increase? Does not this accentuate the differences between these grey areas and the development areas?

It is self-evident that any increase in inducements on behalf of the development areas discriminates against other parts of the country. During the last year we have set up a Committee to examine intermediate areas and to report on their problems. I think it is a pity that this was not done several years earlier.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many chairmen and how many members of regional economic planning councils have resigned or indicated their unavailability for reappointment since these councils were first established.

In the three years since the 8 English councils were established, 3 chairmen and 42 members out of a total membership of 230 have resigned or indicated that they were not available for reappointment.

Since this indicates that many past members are concerned about the lack of impact on the formulation and execution of Government policy and the councils' activities, would it not be an appropriate time to ask the councils to submit and publish a memorandum suggesting the future powers and compositions of the councils, so that this can be considered at the same time as the Local Government Commission's Report is under consideration by the Government and this House?

I will certainly consider discussing with the regional chairmen the interesting point put by the hon. Gentleman. However, I do not think that in the vast majority of these cases there is any causative connection between their resignations and their feelings about the work of the councils. In nearly all cases the resignations have been due to business and personal reasons.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what was the total expenditure on promoting economic development, and on measures to reduce unemployment in, and emigration from, the development areas in each of the last 12-month periods to the latest convenient date.

In each financial year from 1st April, 1964, about £33 million, £77 million, £91 million and £265 million.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it is a great pleasure to see him answering Questions? Can he say how many new jobs are being created by this large expenditure? Is he satisfied that he is getting value for money?

I thank the hon. and gallant Gentleman for his somewhat generous remarks. These measures are having the effect of reducing unemployment. In April the wholly unemployed rate for Scotland, Wales and the Northern Region was lower than it was in 1963, and it will continue to fall once the effect of the regional employment premium begins to work it way through.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that it is of the highest importance that we should have a very much closer correlation between the substantial cost of these regional policies and the effect of creating unemployment? We must have some clearer idea of the cost per job, because we are spending a great deal of money on this.

It is expected that the totality of the present measures will reduce the disparity between the overall levels of unemployment in the development areas and the national average by at least a half during the next three years. Because of the un-predecented nature of the measures, particularly the regional employment premium, it is not possible to forecast the rate at which that will happen.

I, too, congratulate my hon. Friend on his appointment. Can he confirm that during the next four years more than 42,000 new jobs in manufacturing industry alone will be created in the Northern Region? Is not that a welcome development, and an indication that we are getting at least some value for money?

We are aware of the tremendous efforts which have been made in the more recent past to relieve the difficult situation in the Northern Region, and my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster is continuing his intensive efforts to ensure that the appropriate result will accrue.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the statement in The Times of 29th March by the chairman of a public company which has been in the same location for 25 years that the company is receiving in free hand-outs £100,000 a year without having to employ even one extra worker? Is not that a wasteful use of taxpayers' money?

The hon. Gentleman should appreciate that expenditure of that kind is aimed at increasing the turnover of the business concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement about the work of the commissioning body that is considering proposals made by the South-East Regional Economic Planning Council calling for a detailed long-term planning study of the region's future development.

The commissioning body held its first meeting on 2nd May. Agreement was reached on the terms of reference for the study and the setting-up of the planning team. I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the notice issued to the Press.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there seems to be an ever-increasing number of bodies claiming to be concerned with planning in the South-East, and that this is causing great confusion? Will he understand that what the South-East wants is fewer planning fingers in the pie and a return to real economic development?

The South-East is the largest of the planning regions, and I have no doubt that this additional study, which takes as its starting point the outline strategy of the regional council, will be of great value to it.

Will my right hon. Friend accept that, because of the lack of planning much of the chaos in the South-East, which has been reflected in London, has got worse, and that only planning will alleviate the problem? Will he undertake to take that up, and not take note of the ridiculous assumptions made by hon. Gentlemen opposite?

My hon. Friend is right. If there had been sensible regional policies before we came to power, we would not have been faced with the gross regional imbalance between the South and the North which has so disfigured the country and added to our problems today.

Does the right hon. Gentleman really regard paying £100,000 for not one extra job as sensible regional policy?

Quite clearly the hon. Gentleman has not understood the philosophy and purpose of the regional employment premium. Its purpose is to make manufacturing industries in development areas relatively able to compete more successfully than similar industries in other regions. That is its purpose. We have had at most nine months to a year's experience of this new measure, and it is far too early to judge its effects.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on the discussions about the paper on the medium-term prospects for the economy held in April with the National Economic Development Council.

The Council had a useful discussion at its May meeting on the basis of a working paper which I introduced. Work is in hand on preparing a further document for the autumn.

I am glad that they had a useful discussion. Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, in the sort of mini National Plan which was being discussed, the two criteria of the interventionist policy outlined by the First Secretary of State, and the workers' objection to the Prices and Incomes Bill, were taken into account when discussing this paper, and will the right hon. Gentleman place a copy of it in the Library?

Prices and incomes policy, which I gather the hon. Gentleman is referring to, was not discussed as part of this document, which, as I indicated, was a working paper giving a provisional view of the medium-term assessment over the next few years.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what estimate he has made of the effect on the existing programme for the development areas of the changes in Selective Employment Tax contained in the Budget.

The increase in Selective Employment Tax will have no appreciable effect on the programme and the S.E.T. relief to hotels in certain rural parts of the development areas should be of particular help where tourism is an important source of income.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that is rather a surprising reply? Would not he agree that, if development is to be balanced and permanent, service industries must be developed, and that the increase in the basic rate must affect that?

With regard to the increase in the basic rate, the hon. and gallant Gentleman should remember that service industries have been lightly taxed compared with goods. Though taxes on goods and services have been increased, the unemployment rate is expected to fall. The Government's proposals for hotel development grants and loans, and the revision of the S.E.T. in respect of hotels in certain rural parts of development areas, will be of particular assistance to those areas in which the tourist industry is of great importance.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the S.E.T. concession to the tourist industry in parts of the development areas creates an important precedent? Will he follow that up and introduce much more selectivity and flexibility into the operation of this kind of tax so that the S.E.T. can become an instrument of regional planning?

My hon. Friend will be aware that all tax is constantly being reviewed.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what proportion of the membership of the Regional Economic Planning Councils is comprised of persons who are also members of county, county borough or county district councils in their respective regions.

About 40 per cent. comprise members and officers of local authorities in their regions.

In view of the influence which planning councils wield on Whitehall, does not the hon. Gentleman think that they should contain a higher proportion of those holding elected office, and those appointed who more closely represent the changed political composition of the local authorities?

The objective here is to get a cross-section of the community who have an interest in regional planning represented within the region.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what machinery exists for ensuring contact between regional economic planning boards and officials of local authorities within their regions; whether he is satisfied that it is working effectively; and if he will make a statement.

Economic planning boards consult regularly with the Standing Conferences of Local Authorities and with the officers of individual local authorities in their regions. These arrangements are working effectively.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman is aware of the grave dissatisfaction felt by many local authorities at the lack of consultation? Will he issue a direction to remedy this?

Guidance is being issued to local authorities about the rôle of the regional planning boards and the planning councils, but I do not think that there is the dissatisfaction which the hon. Gentleman suggests. The very presence of the planning councils has led to a number of new standing conferences being set up by local authorities, and the contacts between the two bodies in most regions are very good.

If there were consultations between the regional planning boards and the local authorities, would we not have been spared the humiliation of seeing, in the West Riding, attempts by the North-Eastern Development Council to woo Yorkshire firms and offer them inducements to leave areas of already high unemployment for the North-East?

My hon. Friend seems to be confusing the development councils with the regional planning councils. The North-Eastern Development Council is entirely independent and is not part of the regional planning machinery.

But would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that it makes a complete nonsense of regional planning unless the membership from the elected councils reflects their overall membership? In view of the sweeping and welcome changes which have swept through town halls throughout the country, should there not now be major changes in the representation on these councils?

In the regional economic planning councils, we wish, of course, to have people with experience in local government, and we have a substantial number of representatives. I have recently reviewed council membership and a number of changes have taken place.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when the Humberside feasibility study, completed in August, 1967, will be published.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he expects to receive the findings of the feasibility studies unit for Humberside.

I expect to receive the report of the Central Unit for Environmental Planning during the current Session: but it is too soon to determine a date of publication.

We were asked to wait for the Report of the Economic Planning Council and then for the Government's views on it, and then this new study was set up. Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman has had this Report in his office for some months? Will he guarantee that it will be published before the end of this year, as a good deal of development is being held up on the Humberside?

I do not think that development is being held up by waiting for the publication of this Report. There has been completed a Report by the Physical Planning Unit, which was sent in at once, but the economic appraisal of this, which is always seen as the second stage, has yet to be completed.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will introduce legislation to establish a national investment board.

No, Sir. Since the proposal for a national investment board was first put forward there has been a considerable development in our techniques for economic planning including the co-ordination of private investment. In the circumstances an investment board is not necessary.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that that reply is most disappointing? Can he now tell the House how the Government propose to control the investment of, for example, insurance companies and banks, over which they seem to have no control?

My hon. Friend should remember that the Board of Trade and the C.B.I. quite separately collect a lot of information on the investment functions of private industry and the system of industrial development certificates also yields us material information. The work of the E.D.C.s also contributes to it and we are well aware of the intentions in their own industries.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that one of the pioneers of the suggestion of a National Investment Board was his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister? Does he now suggest that the information collected by the C.B.I. is in such detail and carries with it such sanctions that it can replace that idea of the Prime Minister?

We on this side do not remain still at 10 years ago, as the Tories do. When the suggestion was made, it was highly relevant to the fact that the Tories had created no instruments of planning.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will take steps to establish a national planning college.

Before considering this idea, the Government will wish to study the Report which the Fulton Committee is preparing.

Would my hon. Friend agree that this conception of a National Planning College in the T.U.C.'s recent Economic Review is an admirable idea? What is the Government's attitude now to this proposal?

It is a very interesting idea, but since the Fulton Committee's Report is due in just over a month, it would be better for the Government not to prejudge its verdict on that Committee's findings.

Is it not extremely important that planners should be fit for their job? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the answers given by himself and his colleagues on the Treasury Bench this afternoon raise great doubts about this?

If we ever set up a national planning college, if it were necessary, we would recognise the great value which Government could obtain from the advice of such a body and the expertise which it would develop. At the same time, we would consider the needs of the Opposition and consider setting up an economic planning kindergarten for them.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether, in order to promote industrial efficiency he will request the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation to acquire Henry Wiggin and Company of Hereford.

My right hon. Friend sees no reason in the public interest for making such a request.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that this Canadian-owned company has refused to recognise the Association of Scientific, Technical and Managerial Staffs and has dismissed the Association's local secretary from his employment with the company? Would my right hon. Friend make it clear to foreign-owned companies that, if they wish to operate here, they must conform to our customs and practices?

I am sorry to hear of that dispute. I know that the company recognises a wide variety of trade unions and has agreements with them, but, on a specific issue like this, I should have thought that my hon. Friend should put down a Question to the First Secretary of State.

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that, if the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation is to play a useful function, it should resist requests and directions from his Ministry and perform a more objective operation?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman will read the fine Report of the I.R.C. published today, when I am sure that he will agree that it is doing a fine job.

May I say that Henry Wiggin is the largest and most important industry in my constituency? Is the Minister aware that Henry Wiggin is in the forefront of the new trend towards the negotiation of labour agreements at plant level, that its exports have doubled in five years to a total of £7 million and that its productivity per employee has also doubled over the last five years—

Order. Questions must be brief.

With respect, Sir, this is a matter of great importance to my constituents—

Order. Every hon. Gentleman's question is important.

May I, therefore, ask the Minister whether he will disregard the tone of the question of his hon. Friend, since it was totally ignorant?

I am sure that the House will be grateful for the information which the hon. Gentleman has given us.

Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that this was an irresponsible Question? Would he not agree that he should give due weight to the remarks of my hon. Friend, in whose constituency this firm is? Will he tell his hon. Friend what Section 2(1) of the Industrial Reorganisation Act actually says?

I have made it clear that the firm negotiates with a wide number of unions. One knows of its agreements this year and I suggested that, if there is, as could well be the case with many firms, a difference between it and one union, this is surely a question for the First Secretary.

On a point of order. In view of the rather better answer to the very unsatisfactory Question which was asked, I beg to give notice that I will raise the matter on the Adjournment.

Order. Notice must be given in the conventional fashion.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he now expects to receive the Report from the Hunt Committee.

I understand that the Committee is hoping to report in the autumn.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us would not be entirely astonished if North-East Lancashire were to figure rather prominently in any findings of the Hunt Committee? Would he, therefore, give an assurance that the Government will speedily implement its recommendations?

I am absolutely certain that North-East Lancashire's case has been submitted to and will be very carefully considered by the Hunt Committee. The Government will obviously act upon suggestions of the Hunt Committee when they have considered what those conclusions are.

Reinforcing the points made by the hon. Member for Accring-ton (Mr. Arthur Davidson), does the Minister recall that when the Chairman of the North-West Economic Planning Council said that he would not be available for reappointment, he indicated that this was because of the sense of frustration at the lack of progress in connection with the problems of exactly the areas the hon. Member spoke about?

I personally do not accept that there has been a lack of action. We have set up this Committee and it is doing its job as quickly as it can be reasonably expected to do it.

If the Hunt Committee is not able to produce a full report by September, will the right hon. Gentleman consider asking it to make an interim report?

I have considered that, but I have reason to believe that we shall get a full report in the autumn as I have indicated.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will obtain from the Hunt Committee the evidence it has so far heard on the problems of the Yorkshire and Humberside Region.

Some evidence has already been published but unless the body which submitted it decides to do so it remains confidential to the Committee.

Is the Minister aware that the somewhat leisurely approach of the Hunt Committee to the problems of this and other areas is holding up important decisions about the clearance of industrial dereliction, the siting of industry, and planning of Humberside with which we want to get on?

I cannot accept that the work of this Committee has been proceeding at a leisurely pace. I understand the impatience of my hon. Friends in areas which consider themselves to be intermediate areas, but I must emphasise that this is a serious problem which requires a serious and thorough examination.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when the report of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research on the economic effects of immigration will be published; and if he will make a statement.

The study is not yet complete and publication will not be possible until sometime next year. An article on one aspect of the study was published in the Institute's Review for August, 1967.

Is the Minister aware that I was told by the previous Chancellor of the Exchequer in March, 1967, that the report would be available within 12 months? We are now told that it will be more than two years before it is available. Does the Minister agree that if the intention is to put this problem of immigration in proper prospective it is essential that the economic and social effects of continuing immigration should be known? Will he speed up the report?

It is precisely for this reason that delay has arisen because we are awaiting information from the 1966 population census. Otherwise, the report would be based on 1961 figures. I am sure that the hon. Member would agree that these would be utterly irrelevant to the present situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he is satisfied with the progress made by the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation in securing industrial organisation; and if he will make a statement.

As its first Report records, the I.R.C. has made impressive progress in its first 15 months in promoting industrial reorganisation and development. It has already established for itself a strategic rôle by acting as a catalyst for the structural change needed to strengthen our competitive position. The I.R.C. is led by a distinguished and experienced team and is able as an independent statutory body toenter into frank and confidential discussions with individual companies. I should like to take this opportunity of thanking the Corporation for its valuable work.

Reference has already been made to the fine work of the Corporation during its first year, but does the Minister note one rather discordant feature, namely, the assertion of the view that the remedial action for improving the structure of industry has, to use its words, tended to be rather too slow? Could he make a comment on that?

So far as the I.R.C. has been able to influence mergers, it has proceeded as quickly as anyone could reasonably have expected considering that the Corporation was set up only 15 months ago. I think what the hon. Member is referring to is the comment in the report of the Corporation that there were many firms which with advantage could amalgamate but for various reasons they have not yet done so.

How much public money has so far been invested or loaned by the I.R.C?

That is set out in the Report of the Corporation.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if he will give details of his plans to increase the hotel accommodation in Gibraltar.

The Government of Gibraltar have accepted our offer of a grant of approximately £50,000 and an Exchequer loan of approximately £120,000 to enable them to provide assistance for the expansion of two hotels in Gibraltar.

Is the Minister aware that if the tourist trade is really to be developed in Gibraltar another 1,500 beds are required?

There are no plans at the moment in such a form that we are able to decide whether to aid them or not. There are no plans which are held up, but we are prepared to consider carefully any plans put to us.

In view of the time factor in providing extra beds, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the acquisition of a suitable liner such as the "Caronia", which could help immediately?

I answered a question on this subject the other day. It is not my view that that would be a viable proposition, but I will consider any propositions from Gibraltar of that kind in more detail.

asked the Prime Minister (1) whether he will appoint a Minister for Exports in the House of Commons;

My right hon. Friend the Presi- dent of the Board of Trade, who is in charge of the export drive, answers in this House for all aspects of his work. I am satisfied that the measures of coordination are working well, Sir.

In view of the outstanding success which the work of various Ministers has already had in promoting exports, is there not a case for expanding the Overseas Marketing Corporation, or establishing a British export corporation which would have a direct link with advisory and commercial activities of the Government?

The new Corporation is getting into its stride and doing very useful work which can be only an adjunct to the normal work of British industry in its exports. It is certainly the case that export orders are developing extremely well although there are certain sectors of the economy where I do not think any of us can feel too satisfied about the amount of work being put in.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the only years when we have had a trade balance in our favour were 1822, 1956 and 1958 under Conservative Governments—[Interruption.]—a visible trade balance? The prime need now is to save imports and the best way of doing that is to stimulate home agriculture very much more than the Government are doing.

Without going back with the right hon. and learned Gentleman into ancient history, I would certainly agree, of course, that it has been extremely rare that on direct trade account we have been in surplus, but the most recent time was in fact for a few months around the end of 1966 and early 1967, which again was a very short period. Certainly we are now, and have been for several years, accounting by our exports for a much higher proportion of imports than we were before the war. This is certainly true and it has been for some 10 or 12 years, but I agree with the right hon. and learned Gentleman about the need to save imports. One of the anxieties of the last few months—I would not exaggerate it—has been the success of overseas suppliers, despite the differential advantage following devaluation, in exporting more to this country.

Although it was expected that the level of exports would take a long time to rise after devaluation, it was expected that imports, in particular manufactured imports, would fall rather earlier, but in fact that has not happened. This is rather disquieting. Will my right hon. Friend turn his attention to this?

This is the point I was trying to deal with. Probably my hon. Friend could not hear me because of the noise made by hon. Members opposite. I said that there was some anxiety about this and, despite the differential advantage on prices following devaluation, some overseas suppliers have been energetic in actually encroaching on our market when the effects of devaluation should be that our own manufacturers should be pressing much harder to capture markets normally supplied from abroad.

How many of the Bland Committee's 40 recommendations to help invisible exports have been implemented other than the one to set up another committee? When are the Government to implement the one extending Selective Employment Tax rebate to earners of invisible exports?

I could not say without notice how many of those 40 recommendations have been implemented, but the right hon. Gentleman will be aware, I think, of the very big increase in invisible earnings over the last few months despite the difficulties in relation to the Suez Canal. The question of S.E.T. is a matter better left to those of our colleagues dealing with the Finance Bill.

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech of the Minister of Labour on incomes policy at the Amalgamated Engineering Union national committee meeting on 25th April represents Government policy.

asked the Prime Minister whether the speech of the Minister of Labour on incomes policy at Eastbourne on Thursday, 25th April represents Government policy.

Yes, Sir.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that that speech might have been a good occasion to make it clear that productivity and social justice might have been aided by allowing more free entry to the engineering industry by Government-trained persons and easier acceptance of them by the industry?

This is a point that both my right hon. Friend and I have made repeatedly to the trade unions concerned, particularly to the A.E.F. and to the T.U.C. I made it to the Labour Party conference last year, and the T.U.C. has now agreed in discussions to examine cases where anyone who has received training is not admitted into appropriate work.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the Minister said that it was not intended that there should be any reduction in the standard of living, whereas the Chancellor has said that it is necessary that we should have a 1 per cent. drop in the standard of living? Is he aware that it is particularly important that the Government should not be seen to be speaking with two voices on this matter, and that in these matters in particular the Chancellor's voice should prevail over that of the Minister?

The Government have not been speaking with two voices, but I can always rely on my hon. Friend to speak with a third, whatever the subject may be. If he was listening to the speech of my right hon. Friend in the debate on prices and incomes, he would have heard her deal with precisely that question. Given an even minimal increase in productivity, which was the main theme of her speech to the A.E.F., a very substantial increase in living standards is possible this year, but it is dependent on productivity, as she said.

asked the Prime Minister what steps he will now take to help the prospects for negotiations to end the war in Vietnam.

Both sides are fully aware that our help is available when they desire it. And as the House will know, my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is at the moment in Moscow where Vietnam is among the subjects being discussed.

Does not the essential factor remain the ending of the bombing? If the Government accepted that policy, as urged by the Labour Party conference, could not my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary succeed in getting joint action in Moscow?

For more than 18 months, long before the resolution to which my hon. Friend referred, we have been trying to help, with the Soviet Union, to get the conditions in which the bombing could end and the parties come to the conference table. The parties are now at the conference table. I do not think that we can help by contributions of that kind. But I am sure that my right hon. Friend in Moscow will join with the Soviet Union in any action that can be taken to further the purposes of the talks.

Is it not now a fact that nine-tenths of North Vietnam is no longer subject to American bombing, whereas the whole of South Vietnam is still being attacked by the Communists? Is it not also a fact that the best service the Prime Minister can render to the negotiations in Paris is to keep out of them?

I am not sure of the exact figure of nine-tenths, but a very high proportion of North Vietnam is no longer subject to American bombing. Infiltration to the south has been the problem. One of the reasons why the parties are getting together is that the Soviet Union and we ourselves refused to accept the advice of the hon. Gentleman but worked hard in private to get conditions in which the parties could get together.

Whatever views might be held on the other side of the House, has my right hon. Friend noted that U Thant made a statement after the beginning of the Paris conference that he still regards the cessation of all American bombing operations as the essential condition of progress at the conference? Will my right hon Friend support that view?

My hon. Friend can be assured that throughout this period we have been at least as closely in touch with the situation as the Secretary-General of the United Nations and had to form our own judgment about what would help. Now that the parties are together, no one under-rates the tremendous difficulties about the negotiations. I think that, apart from the essential work of getting in touch with our co-Chairman, the best thing is to let the parties get on with it if they will.

asked the Prime Minister if he will invite Chancellor Kiesinger to visit London.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will pay an official visit to Western Germany.

I very much valued the opportunities which occurred three times last year for conversations with Dr. Kiesinger, and look forward to further opportunities in the future. Nothing, however, is planned at present.

But in view of the traditional French export performance in revolutions, does my right hon. Friend agree that the time has come for Britain and Germany urgently to co-ordinate their reactions to the political earthquake which is now shaking Gaullism to its foundations?

I do not think that I should reply to my hon. Friend's question about what is happening in France, for such a reply might be construed as intervention in the internal affairs of another country. We are in close touch with the German Government on all matters of European cooperation. My hon. Friend will be aware that my right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary is visiting Bonn on his way back from the Soviet Union.

Is the Prime Minister aware that there are real anxieties in the minds of some people in this country about the political trends in Germany? What is the Government's position towards a peace treaty with Germany?

I assume that in talking about anxiety about trends, the hon. Gentleman is referring to recent Land elections and to the growth of parties then; that no one in the House would support. There is some anxiety about that in this country and in Germany, though we should be wrong to exaggerate this or to assume that it means any substantial revival of Nazism in that country. In relation to a peace treaty, our position is exactly as it has been explained before.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that nothing could be more injurious to the prospect of the future unity of Europe than any appearance of Britain ganging up with Germany against France? Does he accept that there are many millions of people in this country who greatly welcome the development of democracy in France, as witnessed by the occurrences of recent weeks, and we hope that it will result in the overthrow of authoritarian institutions, thereby leading to better opportunities of consultation with this country?

My hon. Friend only a few months ago was suggesting that we should get closer to the French Government. But I do not think that it would be right to comment on what is going on in France at the present. There is certainly no question of ganging up with other European countries against France. Our position has been stated over a very long period. We are prepared to deal with the Common Market countries as a whole, not to take sides.

Is the Prime Minister aware that the least damage might be done to Anglo-German relations if both these visits took place simultaneously?

Although we are always ready to accord a welcome to any influential and prominent foreign Minister and will treat him with the utmost courtesy, may we have an assurance from my right hon. Friend that no time will be wasted by discussing the dead wood of the Common Market?

I have nothing to add to previous answers on the Common Market. I am only saying that in this particular week when my hon. Friend—and my right hon. Friend earlier in the week—expressed great interest in what is going on in France, it would not be appropriate for me to comment on it.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on the present situation with regard to Rhodesia.

I have nothing to add to the Answers given to Questions by my right hon. Friend the Commonwealth Secretary on 21st May and by myself on 16th May.—[Vol. 765, c. 270–5; Vol. 764, c. 1392–4.]

Did my right hon. Friend notice that Dr. Hastings Banda, who could hardly be accused of being anti-African, said on television the other night that he thought that this matter could be settled by further conversations between the Prime Minister and Mr. Smith? Will he take Dr. Banda's advice on how to set about this? Dr. Banda is coming back to London on Monday night.

I am aware of Dr. Banda's travel arrangements. I spent several hours with him yesterday and discussed these matters with him. I do not think that Dr. Banda is in a position to offer any hope to me or my hon. Friend that Mr. Smith after his recent pronouncements has any intention of honouring the six principles. When we see some sign that he is, that would create a different situation.

Though I do not want to lose my passport, may I again put to the Prime Minister the point I put to him some time ago—when will he realise that sanctions against Rhodesia are not working, and will not work?

That is not a proposition I accept. Even if it were, I do not believe that the majority of the House believe that after all the statements made by the previous Government and the present Government we should surrender on the six principles which the whole House has endorsed.

Will my right hon. Friend maintain the same concern for all the people of Rhodesia as he has for all the people of Gibraltar, unlike the Opposition?

That raises two questions. We never proposed to supply frigates to Spain, as the previous Government did within a month of Spain laying claim to Gibraltar. As for Rhodesia—we are carrying out the policy, which the previous Government annunciated, of accepting our responsibilities to all the 4 million people of Rhodesia.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that some of us on this side who supported him on oil sanctions would now only wish that he had shown a bit more flexibility in this matter?

The view of many Commonwealth countries is that I have shown too much flexibility—for example, in the "Tiger" talks. The conditions offered to Mr. Smith then were fair and honourable and I regret that they were not accepted. [An HON. MEMBER: "What a hope!"] I think that Mr. Smith wanted to accept them but was overborne when he got back to Rhodesia. The terms were perfectly fair and have recently been endorsed, even by the Conservative Party, which voted against them at the time. So it is no good saying, "What a hope!"