asked the President of the Board of Trade what are his latest estimates as to the volume and value of imports in the second half of 1968; and how they compare with those given in the Financial Statement.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer given in this House on 25th June by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.—[Vol. 767, c. 217–8.]

That does not take us very much further forward. I remind the President that we witnessed in the first quarter of this year an increase in imports due to a spending spree; we witnessed in the second quarter of the year—[HON. MEMBERS: "A question."]—I am coming to the question—and in the second quarter we witnessed a still further increase due to restocking. I ask the President of the Board of Trade if he can expect a down-turn of these figures for the second half of this year.

The Question related to whether the Government would give additional forecasts for the second half of the year beyond what was given in the Financial Statement by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to which my Answer was to repeat his, namely, "No". I think the Government have a good record in publishing the bases of its forecasts. Since it is only a very few months since it was forecast, we had better see how we go.

asked the President of the Board of Trade by how much imports are at present running at a rate in excess of that implied in the forecast published in the Financial Statement in March.

Imports of goods and services in the first quarter of this year were some £70 million higher, at 1958 prices, than the rate forecast for the first half-year.

That is extremely disappointing and I hope that we can hear something more encouraging from the Government—

Order. The hon. Member must put a question.

"Is he aware?"

Do not worry, he is not aware.

Perhaps, Mr. Speaker, I was not sufficiently awake, I hope you will excuse me. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is concern in the House least he should resort to panic measures later this year by way of import controls to try to right the balance which seems to be getting out of hand?

I am aware that the figures for the first few months of this year on imports were not as many of us would have hoped. I think it will take some time for devaluation to have its effect. I am certain that it will have its effect. In the meantime I have no intention of taking any panic measures.

As the upturn in the import cycle is always the Achilles heel of the visible balance, will my right hon. Friend commission a study into the prior deposit system for imports, as no study exists in this country at the moment?

I do not think my hon. Friend's assumption is right that imports are always the Achilles heel. On the contrary, if he looks—as no doubt he has done—at the findings of the recent Brookings Study he will see that if one takes a long period what is peculiar about the British experience is not the behaviour of imports but the behaviour of exports.

Is it not a fact that to some extent high import figures are caused by the fact that suppliers of manufactured and semi-manufactured goods overseas have been cutting their prices to offset the effect of devaluation? If this is so, is not the effect likely to continue permanently?

It is certainly true that overseas suppliers to this country, as one might have expected, have been cutting prices in the post-devaluation situation and naturally wish to preserve their share of the market in the new conditions, but this is only one of the factors causing the increase and it is much too early to say that the long-term trend will be substantially different from what we expected a few months ago.

Since following devaluation we anticipated that the effect on imports would be much more certain than the rise in exports and this has not happened to anything like the extent that was hoped for, is it not time to look at the problem more carefully and to make sure that we avoid taking action too late, as has happened too often in the past?

I can assure my hon. Friend that I look at the matter carefully and almost continuously, but he must accept that devaluation cannot be expected to operate rapidly on the state of imports. Many of the imports now coming into the country are still imports ordered before devaluation and it must take a considerable time for the pattern of trade in these matters to alter.

Is there not now evidence that much of the stock-building of imports going on is due to the fear of import controls, and is not this gravely affected by the continual harping of some of the right hon. Gentleman's hon. Friends who desire to impose import controls?

It is extremely hard to say from the figures whether there is any precautionary element due to a feeling that there might be import controls or restrictions of any kind, but if this feel- ing exists let me make clear that the Government do not have any intention of imposing import controls.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps he is taking to redress the adverse balance of Anglo-Danish trade, whereby Denmark is selling to Great Britain approximately £70 million more than Great Britain sells to Denmark, so that, for every £2 of British sales to Denmark, Great Britain buys approximately £3 from Denmark; and whether he will make a statement on Anglo-Danish trade.

Since 1960, total trade between Britain and Denmark has grown by nearly 55 per cent. We have followed up the highly successful British Week in 1964 by a series of trade promotions, culminating in a trade drive this year which included store promotions in several Danish towns and a British Engineering Exhibition in Copenhagen. I have firm hopes that our exports to Denmark will increase as a result.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the most important export from Denmark to Britain is bacon, that the Danes have 50 per cent. of the British market for bacon, that home producers have only 34 per cent., and that other foreigners and Commonwealth sources have 16 per cent.? In those circumstances is this not a rewarding field for the policy of import substitution—more English bacon and less Danish bacon? Would the right hon. Gentleman apply himself to that?

I will gladly apply myself to any question that the hon. Member directs towards me, and I hope that he will apply himself to not making statements about bank mergers before he has even read a copy of the Report. As to the question he asks about substituting home-produced bacon for imported bacon, we would all of us like to save imports, and recently ambitious ideas for agricultural import saving have been advanced. When we are considering these we must also consider the possible cost to the consumer or to the taxpayer. I think that under the current Selective Expansion Programme we are moving satisfactorily in the kind of direction that the hon. Gentleman would like.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the progress made so far with the proposals of the Rio Tinto Zinc Corporation and the British Aluminium Company to produce aluminium in Great Britain; and how he proposes to protect them from Soviet competition in world markets, in view of the fact that Soviet electricity is supplied at one-twenty-fifth the price in the Western world.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proposals he now has for establishing an economic and viable aluminium smelting industry in Great Britain.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he will make a further statement about the establishment of aluminium smelters.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the estimated total cost to public funds of the aluminium smelter programme.

Negotiations with the British Aluminium Company and the RTZ/BICC consortium are making progress; both I and the companies aim to bring them to a successful conclusion in the near future. Negotiations with Alcan are complete and planning permission has been issued for their smelter and power station. Site preparation work at Lynemouth will begin shortly. I am satisfied that we have adequate powers to deal with any unfair Soviet competition.

Whilst welcoming the announcement of the decisions, may I ask whether the President of the Board of Trade is aware that the recent Parliamentary Delegation to Siberia was shown great plants which were producing electricity at one-twenty-fifth of our price and that we were told that 60 per cent. of the production of aluminium was from electricity? How can our people compete? Will the right hon. Gentleman make some inquiries and try to safeguard our people?

I was very interested in this part of the hon. Gentleman's Question. I have looked into the figures in great detail. We import a certain amount from the Soviet Union. The amount has been growing, but it is still quite a small proportion of our total imports of aluminium. If not only the Government but also the companies think that they will be able to compete with fair imports from the Soviet Union, we should take this as being a reasonable commercial judgment.

I regret that there has been this long delay in reaching the decision. Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that three separate units will in the end be economic and viable, bearing in mind that the combined capacity of these units will be one-third that designed for a modern aluminium smelting unit in the U.S.S.R. and elsewhere? Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that we shall have a competitive aluminium smelter industry at the end of the day?

Yes. Neither the Government nor the three companies concerned would have been spending so much time on detailed negotiations, as we have been, unless we were all of us satisfied that the outcome would be an economic, viable and competitive smelter industry.

As the first announcement on this subject was made in the fresh and heady atmosphere of Scarborough last year by the Prime Minister, will the right hon. Gentleman note that we would much prefer the next announcement to be made to the House rather than in similar circumstances in Blackpool in the autumn?

I do not know why this prejudice against either Scarborough or Blackpool should emerge from hon. Members opposite. I hope that it will be noted by the constituents of the hon. Gentleman and of some of his hon. Friends. I certainly hope to be able to make a further announcement—one, I hope, of a detailed kind—on this subject before the House rises for the Recess.

What will the total cost to public funds of these smelters be? How can the right hon. Gentleman possibly justify this to the E.F.T.A. Council in the face of this absolutely obvious and clear subsidy which we are putting into these smelters?

I cannot say what the cost to public funds will be until the negotiations are complete. The hon. Member knows full well that we have strongly maintained—I think with considerable support—that no element of subsidy will be involved in the creation of these smelters.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the whole of Scotland is desperately anxious that we get one of these smelters in Invergordon in the Highlands? Can my right hon. Friend say at this point whether that will be the case and whether there are any objections to it or any other of these projects from our E.F.T.A. partners?

I am well aware that very strong feelings are held in Scotland about the location of one of these smelters at Invergordon. I hope that the negotiations about this will come to a fruition. I have already referred briefly to the E.F.T.A. objections and there is another Question on the Order Paper relating to these.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what consultations there were with the European Free Trade Association countries before October, 1967, about the proposals for establishing an aluminium smelting industry in Great Britain.

None, Sir. The proposals for expanding the aluminium smelting industry in Great Britain were first raised in the Official Council of E.F.T.A. by the Norwegian Government, following the announcement by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in his speech to the Labour Party Conference at Scarborough on 4th October, 1967.

Is it not deplorable that the Government did not think fit to discuss with our E.F.T.A. partners this important question of aluminium smelting, since they have for some years objected to the whole system of investment grants as providing a means of unfair subsidy to industry, power generation and other activities?

I do not understand why the hon. Gentleman should consider it necessary that, on a commercial proposition made by private firms to the Government, which in no way breaches any international regulation, the Government should consult foreign Governments before coming to a decision. We took account of the interests of the traditional suppliers of aluminium to this country, but we had to make up our own mind on these propositions.

Does my hon. Friend agree that talk of disputes with the E.F.T.A. countries regarding the aluminium smelting industry does no service to the industry, to the E.F.T.A. partnership or to the prospect of job opportunities which the industry is presenting to this country?

My hon. Friend will appreciate from the earlier answer given by my right hon. Friend that we are going ahead with the negotiations and we fully intend to have an aluminium smelting industry in this country.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the extent of Government financial assistance for the power station to be constructed for the aluminium smelter at Lynemouth.

I would refer the hon. Member to the Answer I gave on 20th June to the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley).—[Vol. 766, c. 176.]

As the right hon. Gentleman was able to tell my hon. Friend practically nothing more this afternoon, can the hon. Gentleman tell us something about the order of the assistance at Lynemouth and in the other two cases still under consideration, though I appreciate that he cannot yet give us full details?

It is quite clear that assistance to the alumium projects, as with all other manufacturing investments in developing areas, will consist of investment grants where appropriate and Local Employment Acts grants where appropriate. However, the hon. Gentleman is asking me about the power station, and there is no grant for that. The specific figures for individual companies cannot be given because they are confidential.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the cost of the Government's contribution per permanent job expected to be provided by the aluminium smelter to be built at Lynemouth.

Information about assistance to individual applicants under the Local Employment Acts is confidential.

Does the hon. Lady realise that it is being suggested that this will cost the Government, irrespective of the contributions of industry, over £30,000 per job to be created, and that the sooner we have either denial or acceptance of those figures, the better?

The hon. Gentleman must learn not to believe what he reads in the newspapers.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he is aware that a false impression is given in this country and abroad because of the publication of monthly import and export figures which take no account of the estimated average gain on invisible exports; and if he will include such an estimate in future.

A figure for invisible earnings is now included in the monthly statement on the import and export figures. I think their importance is becoming increasingly understood.

Since there has been a favourable balance on visible trading account only seven times in the last 175 years, would it not be sensible to incorporate an estimate of the invisible earnings actually in the tables rather than in the accompanying text? Would not this avoid the risk of good figures being made to look bad and bad figures, as at present, being made to look terrible?

I entirely share the objective the hon. and gallant Gentleman has in mind. He is right to stress to the House how important invisibles have historically been to our trading account as a whole. The difficulty here is a technical one which has been discussed in the House before—that no method has yet been found under successive Governments of getting the invisible monthly figures in time to incorporate them in the monthly trade figures.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on the various recommendations in the report of the Bland Committee on Great Britain's invisible earnings which are still being considered by the Government.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how many meetings have been held by the permanent Committee on Invisible Exports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what recommendations have so far been made to him by the permanent Committee on Invisible Exports; and when the report of the Committee will be published.

The Committee has held one meeting and plans to hold another next week. In between these quarterly meetings, ad hoc sub-committees are considering particular problems; and the reactions of the interested bodies to the recommendations of the Bland Committee are being assembled. So far as action by the Government is concerned, I have nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member for Acton (Mr. Kenneth Baker) on 29th May.—[Vol. 765, c. 1817–8.]

It is now nine months since the Bland Committee reported. Is it not possible for the Government to speed up decisions on the various recommendations on which only Government Departments can take action?

We have taken action already on a number of the recommendations, as I have announced in the House. I should like to speed up any action which the Government ought properly to take. There are so many recommendations that, after thinking of listing them in my Answer, I decided that to do so would make it too long. However, if the hon. Gentleman has one about which he is concerned, I shall be happy to answer a Question on it.

How often, and by what means, will the conclusions and recommendations of the Committee on Invisible Exports be published?

I regret to say that I cannot answer that without notice. If the hon. Gentleman will put down a Question, I shall find out from the Committee, which is an autonomous body not under the control of the Government. I shall ascertain whether the Committee intends to publish anything. I understand that it does not intend to produce any formal reports but it intends to make recommendations, whether to the Government or to private bodies. I shall check on that and write to the hon. Gentleman.

Is not the right hon. Gentleman somewhat dissatisfied with the rate of growth in invisible earnings over the past three or four years, and will he consider making one of his Ministerial colleagues specifically responsible for invisible earnings, which are essential to the country's solvency?

No, Sir, we do not need a special Minister in charge of invisible earnings, almost the whole of which fall within the purview of either the Chancellor of the Exchequer or myself. Lest the hon. Gentleman is dissatisfied with the position, I can inform him that the average annual rate of invisible earnings over the last four years was £150 million whereas in the first quarter of this year it was running at an average rate of £345 million a year.

Although invisible receipts are good, are not invisible payments worth study, in particular, the outflow on investment here? Will my right hon. Friend consider the implications of this and the dangers inherent in it, in that we might be taking action in allowing investment here for short-term balance of payment gains which might do us long-term harm?

These matters are certainly worthy of study, and I shall give a great deal of attention to the dangers and implications which my hon. Friend has brought to my attention. I gather that he is not calling for any basic change in Government policy.

The House will welcome the belated conversion of the Government to a recognition of the value of invisible earnings in our balance of payments, but will the President of the Board of Trade accept that this will not carry conviction until we see the results in changed fiscal policy, exchange control policy and policy on overseas investment?

It is an innocent enough pastime for the hon. Gentleman to score his little party point. The only thing which will carry conviction to the country as a whole is the figure which I have already given for the rise in the invisible surplus from an average over the last four years of £150 million to an annual rate in the first quarter of this year of £345 million.

Does my right hon. Friend recall the remarks of his right hon. Friend the present Chancellor of the Exchequer some years ago when he said that the foreign exchange earnings of British industry were 100 times more important to this country than the foreign exchange earnings of the City of London? Does he appreciate that not all of us share the enthusiasm for invisible exports, believing that they have been bought at heavy cost—

Order. The hon. Gentleman must learn to ask brief questions.

—and may we be assured that the Committee on Invisible Exports will examine this aspect of the matter as well as other aspects?

I have been a great student of both the speeches and the writings of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but I confess that I do not recall that remark in a fairly voluminous output of words over the past 20 years or so. But I take the point which my hon. Friend has in mind. I shall consider the matter, but one must make plain that, given that invisibles are of great importance to this country in our current account, what we want is the largest possible surplus on invisibles.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps are being taken by the British National Export Council to study the question of how far the present system of visible export missions can be extended in its present form, where appropriate, to invisible exports.

No such steps are necessary, since the mission scheme already applies, where appropriate, to invisible exports.

Was not this a strong recommendation of the Bland Committee? Does the hon. Gentleman say that it is already in operation?

It was a recommendation of the Committee, but, as the Government pointed out in the Bland Report, the recommendation seems to have been based on a misapprehension of the present position. The fact is that the mission schemes previously applied, and still applies where appropriate, to invisible exports.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will introduce legislation to set up Board of Trade Advisory Committees in the Northern region and other regions of the country.

No. I do not consider that regional committees would offer any advantages over the present system.

That is a disappointing reply. Does my hon. Friend realise that, in the light of the schedule of jobs likely to be directed to the Northern region and the other development areas, our job potential would be greatly accelerated if we had in the regions advisory committees with knowledge of the regions and knowledge of the industries required for them?

I hope that my hon. Friend accepts that much of the preliminary work is already done in the regions, where there are advisory officers and accountants who do a great deal. We think that this is the most efficient way of proceeding, and we shall continually speed up the process here in our headquarters.

If the hon. Lady does not like her hon. Friend's suggestion, will she tell me what other plans she, the Government or the Prime Minister have to deal with our high rate of unemployment in the North-East? We are not getting on sufficiently because of bad administration.

I cannot accept that. The hon. Lady will be aware that the situation in the North-East has improved considerably in the past few months. Many more jobs have been created, though not as fast as the Government would like. The improvement of B.O.T.AC. procedures is only one small element in the whole question.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what aircraft are will be adequate to enable the British Overseas Airways Corporation; when delivery is expected; whether he is satisfied that the resultant increase in capacity will be adequate to enable the British Overseas Airways Corporation to retain its existing share of trans-Atlantic passenger traffic; and if he will make a statement.

B.O.A.C. has on order two Boeing 707s, one of them for use as a freighter, for delivery within the next few weeks; three Super VC10s for delivery between now and February, 1969; and 11 Boeing 747s for delivery between February, 1970 and April, 1972. This increase of capacity should be sufficient to enable B.O.A.C. at least to maintain its share of the market.

Is it not abundantly clear that policies aimed at maximum profit and policies aimed at a maximum share of the market are becoming mutually exclusive, and is it not time that we looked to the regaining of our increasing share of the market by adopting a more liberal attitude to the applications of independent operators?

There are a number of difficult questions of judgment here. The factors mentioned by the hon. Gentleman are relevant, but, as he knows, the Edwards Committee is now sitting, and, as a result of its deliberations, we shall, I am sure, be able to see the way clearer.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has considered the specific recommendations of the Bland Committee in respect of the hotel and tourist industry; and when he intends to implement them.

The Government's proposals for assistance to the hotel industry were described in the White Paper on Hotel Development Incentives (Command 3633) published on 21st May. Estimates have been published separately of international fare payments and of the amounts spent by overseas visitors on goods not included in the travel account of the balance of payments.

Whilst we welcome the Government's beginning to edge towards taking the advice we have been offering from this side of the House for the past three years, can we now persuade the right hon. Gentleman to bring forward a major and comprehensive programme of assistance to the tourist industry?

Without accepting the assumption in the hon. Gentleman's question, I think that I can say that we are certainly moving towards a full statement on tourist policy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when, in view of the request of the hotel and catering industry for further clarification of the detailed arrangements in the Hotel Development Incentive Scheme, he will make a further statement.

Not at the moment

The Minister will no doubt agree that the main object of the Hotel Development Incentive Scheme is to encourage the industry to produce many more hotel beds rapidly. Does not he agree that the industry might be more prepared to do this at once if it were aware of the conditions which will be attached by the Government to their loan and grant scheme? Cannot a statement be made setting them out?

I should hink that the industry's first priority would be consultation, and we are now consulting with it prior to introducing legislation.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he will announce the conclusions of the study of further measures to promote the development of the tourist industry, to which reference was made in paragraph 44 in the White Paper on Hotel Development Incentives.

As soon as possible.

Is the Minister aware that the report of the little Neddy recommended specifically that the hotel industry should be put on a par with manufacturing industry in connection with industrial building allowances and investment grants? Will he bear these points in mind when the statement is being prepared?

Yes, Sir. I shall certainly bear them in mind. The important thing is to have incentives which are fully tailored to the industry's special needs. That is why we published our White Paper.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what plans he has to implement the recommendation of the Hotel and Catering Economic Development Council that the same assistance should be available to hotels as is extended to industrial establishments.

As paragraph 11 of the White Paper on Hotel Development Incentives explains, the Government do not propose to treat hotels in the same way as industrial establishments; instead we propose grants and loans specially designed to meet the circumstances of the hotel industry.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind the urgency of help to the hotel industry, because the low return on its investment at present is inhibiting new hotel building, as has been pointed out time and again to the Government?

I do not think that there is anything between us on this point, which is that we must help the hotel industry and tourism and so help Britain. Having published the White Paper, the Government will proceed as fast as we can with legislation.

While there is delay in introducing the scheme, the hotel industry continues to bear the heavy burden of the Selective Employment Tax. Taxing the industry on the one hand and distributing money to it on the other is not likely to produce an independent, large industry which will benefit our balance of payments position.

I am aware of the arguments, but now that we have the White Paper we should all try to help the industry with the provisions we are making for it.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what progress his Department is making in its discussions with the British Insurance Association on the statistical deficiencies relating to the insurance industry portfolio investments, foreign earnings on life insurance business overseas, and the home-foreign underwriting business transacted in the United Kingdom.

I have received the views of the British Insurance Association, which are to be considered shortly by the Committee on Invisible Exports.

Will the hon. Gentleman accept that the need for greater information on the subject is important, because the income derived from this source makes up an important part of the insurance market's foreign earnings?

In the course of the discussions we are seeing what additional information can be obtained commensurate with the cost of obtaining it.

How far does the income from this source go towards the startling improvement which the President of the Board of Trade announced this afternoon in invisible exports, with an increase from £150 million a year to the rate of £340 million a year? Does the hon. Gentleman expect this increase to continue?

My right hon. Friend was talking about an invisible surplus. The contribution of these figures will not be known until statistics are available.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he will announce his decision on the Report of the Monopolies Commission on the supply of man-made cellulosic fibres.

I would refer the hon. Member to my reply to the right hon. Member for Leeds, North-East (Sir K. Joseph) on 25th June.—[Vol. 767, c. 56.]

As it is now over three years since the reference was made, and it is four months since the Report has been in the Government's hands, does not the Minister think that the delay is too long? Could not he ensure that a statement is made before the Houses rises for the Summer Recess?

I do not think that the delay is too long. As the hon. Gentleman knows, I have already instituted the tariff review which was recommended by the Monopolies Commission. We have had discussions with the company on the other recommendations, but I do not want to deal with the recommendations in a piecemeal fashion. In view of the importance of the result of the tariff review for getting the whole picture I should prefer to have it, as I hope I will in the next two months, before taking a view on the recommendations as a whole.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will introduce legislation to ensure that companies who intend to divert shareholders' money to political causes give advance warning of the fact in their prospectus and articles of association.

asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) if he will introduce legislation to oblige joint-stock companies to seek permission from annual shareholders' meetings before making contributions to political party funds;

As I informed my hon. Friend the Member for Hampstead (Mr. Whitaker), on 29th May, I think that the provision in the Companies Act, 1967, which requires political contributions to be disclosed, is sufficient for the purpose.—[Vol. 765, c. 1800–1.]

Is my hon. Friend aware that I have had protests from members of all three political parties whose money, subscribed to a commercial concern, has been diverted without their consent to a political end? Is it not unfair that directors should be allowed to do this with money which does not belong to them?

I hope that there are many more protests. The object of giving publicity to these contributions was precisely to enable shareholders to take action if they wished. It is up to the shareholders.

Has the hon. Gentleman any evidence as yet as to whether there have been any protests or other action by shareholders? If he has not, is that not evidence that they realise that this expenditure is in the best interests of their company and an important way of defending their interests against Socialist economic practices which jeopardise the economic prosperity of the country?

I have certainly heard objections by shareholders. It is up to the company to decide, subject to challenge if the shareholders think it appropriate, as to whether such contributions are in the interests of the company.

Is my hon. Friend aware that more; information should be given? Could not trade union money invested through unit trusts be used for a form of investment against the interests of the basic aims of the trade unions and thereafter perhaps be subscribed both to Aims of Industry Limited and to the Tory Party?

The position is that all the information is given. It is required by law that political contributions shall now be revealed. The suggestion that is being made in these Questions is that the shareholders should have a right to prevent their companies making political contributions. Shareholders now know what the facts are.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that, if a shareholder thinks that his company is being run badly he can always contract out?

Certainly, it is up to the shareholders to sell his shares if he thinks that the company is being run badly.

While shareholders may contract out from membership of a company, a trade unionist has to contract in or out from a political contribution. Why should not the same conditions apply to a private company as apply to the unions? Will my hon. Friend introduce legislation to this effect?

There is a difference in position between companies and trade unions, apart from the administrative problems which would be involved. The difference is that it is easy for a shareholder to contract out if he thinks fit.

asked the President of the Board of Trade to what extent British trade has achieved the higher level of exports required to compensate for devaluation; and how much trade has increased above the pre-devaluation level.

In the three months March to May the sterling value of exports was 15 per cent. higher than in the second and third quarters of last year. In terms of dollars exports are already approaching their pre-devaluation level, and they are still rising.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that gross exports have to increase considerably in order to catch up with devaluation? Will he consider publishing the levels of trade in post- and pre-devaluation terms for the next few months?

I will consider any suggestion, but these facts could be deduced fairly easily from the figures we have published.

Is it not the case that in the same period exports to the E.F.T.A. countries have actually fallen?

No, Sir. Over the precise period I have described—March to May—as compared with the second and third quarters of last year, exports to E.F.T.A. have risen, although less than our exports to most other major industrial regions of the world. However, in the last three or four months there has been a sharp uprise in exports to E.F.T.A.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what discussions he had with the trade mission from the Johannesburg Chamber of Commerce; and if he will make a statement.

I had a meeting with the leaders of this Mission at which discussion took place on the principal aspects of our trade and commercial relations. My hon. Friend the Minister of State also received members of the Mission.

I congratulate the right hon. Gentleman on meeting the Mission and hope for added success in this trade, which will do something to counteract the bad effects of the maintenance of the arms blockade on South Africa.

The reasons for maintaining the blockade have been given time and time again, and it does no service to our commercial relations with other countries to conceal that political differences do exist between us. I made it plain that, while there might be political differences with South Africa and Southern Rhodesia, nevertheless we wish to retain good commercial relations.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if, in view of the continued rise in the level of imports he will now take steps to impose selective import controls on non-essential imports of manufactured goods and foodstuffs.

asked the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the latest trade figures, whether the Government will now introduce import controls.

No, Sir.

But if my right hon. Friend was unwilling to consider this matter after devaluation because of the possible effect on the £, does he not now think that the £ has received such massive support that he can reconsider it? Would he not also think that it is a nonsense that the efforts of both sides of industry to gain more exports should be frittered away by this growing rise in the value of imports? Many of the goods are unnecessary. Will my right hon. Friend look at this matter again?

I do not agree with my hon. Friend that there is in logic a case for doing this, having devalued. I always thought that import restrictions of some sort were an alternative to devaluation, but, having devalued, I think that there is very little case for imposing on top of that further import restrictions, and I am very strongly against doing so.

Which do the Socialist Government think preferable in our present difficulties—selective import regulations, or a further twist of the inflationary rack?

Deflationary rack. The Socialist Government think that neither of them is necessary because we still firmly take the view that the devaluation strategy is working and will work.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will make a statement on his recent visit to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.

I had a most useful exchange of views with Mr. Patolichev, the Soviet Minister of Foreign Trade, about the development of Anglo-Soviet trade, and agreed on a programme for negotiating a new trade agreement to replace the present one, which expires in the middle of next year. I was also pleased to have an opportunity to discuss with Mr. Kosygin, not only Anglo-Soviet trade relations, but also a wide range of world economic issues.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether, in his discussions, the question of purchases of Soviet oil by this country was raised? Is he aware that it was raised with us when we were in the Soviet Union recently and that it was made clear that we could purchase Soviet oil at competitive prices and that if we did so it could lead to a considerable breakthrough in purchases by the Soviet Government of goods from this country?

The question of Soviet oil was raised, as it has been raised in bilateral discussions with Soviet Russia over many years. My hon. Friend talks about a breakthrough in the sale of British goods to the Soviet Union. If she looks at the export figures for the first few months of this year she will find that they show an almost dramatic rise on any previous similar four-months period.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, when the question of oil exports was raised in Baku with the delegation, I explained that we as a sterling area country were surplus sellers and not buyers of oil and, therefore, for us to buy Soviet oil would not be in the interests of the sterling area? That was accepted. I cannot understand why the question has been raised.

I took the view, when I learned of the visit of this delegation, that a combination of the hon. Member for Louth (Sir C. Osborne) and my hon. Friend the Member for Wolverhampton, North-East (Mrs. Renée Short) ensured that our diplomacy was in safe hands.

asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has now received the Report of the Inquiry into Productivity and Efficiency by the Textile Council; and if he will make a statement.

The Textile Council expects to let me have its report before the end of the year.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that there is great eagerness in the Lancashire textile towns to see the report? They hope that action will be taken on the basis of positive proposals in it.

I am glad to hear that there is such eagerness in the textile towns, because there was less than complete eagerness among some parts of the textile industry when it came to completing the questionnaire sent out by the Council. I assure my hon. Friend that as soon as the report comes out the Government will give it very urgent consideration.

Is not one of the causes of delay in receiving the report that this fact-finding Committee can find no new facts and that all the facts are already known by the Government?

I cannot accept that. I think that when the report is published it will be clear to the House that a number of interesting new facts and methods of analysis have come to light.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that both sides of the textile industry want to know what the Government's policy will be about import quotas when the present trade agreements expire in 1970? We are getting a little bored and restive through being con- tinuously told that we must await the report. When can we have some action?

I am sorry if my hon. Friend is getting bored and restive. I can only make him more bored and restive by reiterating what I have said many times: I do not propose to take a view about import policy after 1970 until I have had the advantage of seeing the Textile Council's productivity report.

asked the President of the Board of Trade how much imports and exports increased in volume over the first five months of the year, as compared with the first five months of 1967.

Imports, excluding military aircraft from the United States, by 8 per cent. seasonally adjusted, and exports by 4 per cent.

I am glad that the figures appear to be better for the first three months. Is there not still much evidence of the spending spree sucking in too many imports?

No. To judge by the figures of retail sales, it is fair to say that the spending spree is largely over. If one takes an index of the volume of retail sales, this was running at about 106 in the three months before the Budget and how now come down to 100. This suggests that the spending spree is substantially over.

If the right hon. Gentleman excludes figures relating to military aircraft imports from the United States, why should he not exclude figures of exports of military aircraft from this country? Will he give the true figures?

The true figures are given, as the hon. Gentleman surely knows, in every monthly Press statement on the trade figures in which we quote figures of imports, with and without military aircraft, from the United States in precisely the same fashion as has been followed in this country for the last 20 years.

Would my right hon. Friend give us some figures relating to his spot checks on retail sales? Some of the figures reported in the Press have been somewhat confusing. Has he any figures to indicate a more recent trend of retail sales?

As far as we still give spot check figures, they show no change in trend compared with the last monthly figures we published a few days ago. A number of different figures are announced by department stores to the Press, but it is wrong to assume that these stores, which are announcing large increases, are necessarily representative of the retail trade as a whole.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what representations he has received from James Galloway and Sons Paper Mill, Balerno, on development area status; and what reply he has sent.

The company has asked that the Scottish development area should be extended to include the parish of Balerno where its factory is located. After careful examination of the company's request, I have explained to the company why this extension cannot be justified in present circumstances.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this is the only paper mill in the whole of Scotland which does not have development area status? Would not she agree that the paper industry is under intense competition from E.F.T.A. countries and that it provides employment in a very bad employment area in my constituency?

I am very sympathetic with the difficulties facing this paper mill, but I hope that my hon. Friend will accept that many branches of industry find themselves in this difficulty when they are in close relationship with development areas. It would not be possible simply to draw a line round this one paper mill.

Is not this merely one example flowing from the exclusion of the whole of the Edinburgh district from the development area? Does not this give rise to grave difficulties in many other industries within this small enclave, which is excluded from the whole development area of Scotland—for instance, in the shipbuilding industry at Leith?

The shipbuilding industry has had assistance in other ways. We sympathise with industries which find themselves just outside development areas, but the areas were extended to assist many more people. It would be foolish to take any action while we are waiting for the Hunt Report.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why the College of Air Training at Hamble has reduced its pilot intake; and how this will affect its continued existence.

The intake has been reduced for the time being because of a cut-back in the number of pilots required by the Corporations. The continued existence of the college is not affected.

asked the President of the Board of Trade why he gave the Oxford Air Training School a contract to train 500 pilots over a period of five years.

The Board of Trade has placed no such contract.

Is my hon. Friend aware that I am very relieved to hear that statement, but is it not peculiar that such a statement should be made at a time when intake is being reduced? Can I be assured that the College of Air Training at Hamble will still be the chosen instrument for training pilots for the Corporations?

As I think that my hon. Friend knows, this is really a matter for the Corporations. They have placed contracts both in Oxford and in Perth, because it was necessary to ensure that their maximum needs were met. For the moment the demand is not as high as was previously expected.

Can the hon. Gentleman say a little more about the Air Training Schools, particularly Perth and Carlisle? Can he make some confident statement that there is a future for these schools?

Order. The Question is about Oxford.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he is satisfied that existing regulations governing the chartering of aircraft for the carriage of freight do not restrict the expansion of air freight services by adding unnecessarily to their cost; and if he will make a statement.

I am not aware that the existing regulations are restricting the expansion of air freight services.

Is it not true that a shipper who has a cargo made up of items from a large number of manufacturers is prevented from chartering aircraft even if this would be much cheaper than paying the itemised rates for the items of which the cargo is made up?

Under the civil aviation licensing regulations, charter services are defined in what the hon. Gentleman might regard as a fairly narrow way. However, the regulations permit a certain liberty to the Licensing Board, and, as far as I know, the exercise of its present powers has resulted in an increase in freight services rather than the opposite.

Is it not clear that the increase has largely come from increases in cargo carried by passenger transport, and there is an enormous potential for cargo carried by freight aircraft as such? Will the hon. Gentleman look into the matter and see whether he can liberalise matters to the maximum, in view of their great importance to Britain's export trade as well as to the airlines?

I shall look at it in those terms, but, here again, the hon. Gentleman will agree that this is very much a matter for the Edwards Committee and, whereas we must not postpone nececessary action, it would equally be wrong to be precipitate in advance of the full review.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the latest position regarding the negotiations over compensation payments to British European Airways for not being permitted to order aircraft of their choice.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects that British European Airways will place their order for 26 Trident 3B aircraft; and when the aircraft is expected to be in service.

asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the negotiations between British European Airways, Hawker Siddeley and his Department regarding the provision of financial support for the ordering and operation of the Trident 3B aircraft have been completed; and if he will make a statement.

With permission, I will answer these Questions after Question Time.

asked the President of the Board of Trade when he expects to be able to announce a decision on British European Airways' orders for the A300 airbus.

Any such decision must await the outcome of the studies being undertaken by the British, French and German Governments.

Since, to state the case as moderately as I can, there is a certain doubt that the A300 will ever be built, will the hon. Gentleman assure the House that contingency plans are already in being for the construction of an all-British successor to the Trident 3B for B.E.A. and the world market?

I do not think that I can give any such assurance, but B.E.A. is fully aware of the possibilities. I think that we can trust it to be commercially wise and to be fully aware of any developments taking place.

But since negotiations about the A300 are approaching a very difficult and probably critical stage, will the hon. Gentleman bring to the attention of the Prime Minister the very real concern of the aircraft industry and this side of the House over his removal at such a critical moment of the Minister who has had such long experience of dealing with the people concerned and very considerable experience in the technicalities involved?

I do not know which of two Ministers the hon. Gentleman is referring to, but I am sure that my right hon. Friend will note what the hon. Gentleman says.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what proposals he has received for capital expenditure on the provision of hotel accommodation in the United Kingdom by British European Airways and the British Overseas Airways Corporation, respectively, in the period up to 1971.

No specific proposals for the approval of capital investment are before my right hon. Friend at the moment.

Would the Minister agree that should any such proposal come before him it would be very much more in the public interest that the necessary finance for the essential extension of such accommodation should be found wholly in the private sector?

Not necessarily, Sir.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware of the proposal that the nationalised airlines should go into the hotel business and that there is anxiety in the private hotel sector that this may involve unfair subsidies or unfair competition?

The air corporations have power to go into the hotel business and, indeed, they own some hotels at present. I understand the anxiety expressed by the hon. Gentleman, but I remind him that the air corporations will expect to get a satisfactory commercial return and that there will be no subsidy. Secondly, as the House wishes, the Government's purpose is to ensure that the hotel industry, by whomsoever it may be owned, makes an important contribution towards our tourist trade.

Will the hon. Gentleman ensure that, in so far as these hotels are built on land at present belonging to the railway authorities, no specially favourable financial arrangements are made towards the nationalised air corporations as compared with what would be available for independent hotel companies?

I will take note of that point.

Will not this enterprise by the State corporations do a good deal to encourage the tourist trade and bring earnings to this country?

Yes, Sir. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for that supplementary question. We want to encourage enterprise everywhere, and this does not rule out the public corporations, which should be allowed to make their proper contribution to the national economy.

asked the President of the Board of Trade what estimate he has formed of the expenditure by independent British airline operators on the purchase of aircraft of United States manufacture in the period up to 1973.

There is no reliable basis for making a precise estimate; but recent experience suggests that expenditure of this kind by independent airlines may run at about £10 million a year.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the lower the figure for purchases of aircraft from America the better for us. Will the hon. Gentleman do his utmost to ensure that our independent operators and manufacturers are in a proper position to provide British aircraft to British airlines?

The answer is "Yes" to both questions.

Does my hon. Friend agree that devaluation has made certain British aircraft particularly attractive, which is resulting in changes of mind by some of the airlines mentioned by the hon. Member for Woking (Mr. Onslow)?

I understand that to be so.

asked the President Of the Board of Trade if he will give details of orders for British aircraft placed by Eastern bloc countries in the last three years; and what measures he is taking or proposing to take to increase sales of aircraft to these countries.

Six BAC 111s were ordered by Roumania earlier this year. No other aircraft have been sold to Eastern bloc countries in the last three years. The full range of Government export services is available to help exporters of aircraft.

I declare that I have no financial interest in any aircraft company. Is it not time that this self-defeating embargo, particularly on sales to China, was ended so that British manufacturers can go all-out to obtain orders before the American manufacturers get them?