asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether the question of publication of the draft planning document has yet been decided.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement about his further discussions with the National Economic Development Council on a draft planning document.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what plans he has for further discussions with the National Economic Development Council, regarding the formation and publication of the new National Plan.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (1) what estimate he has made of the level of economic growth for 1969 and 1970;

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs on what date a preliminary draft of the new national plan document will be laid before the House of Commons.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what assumption his Department makes about the supply of labour and the level of aggregate demand when forecasting future increases in production capacity.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (1) what estimate he has made of the level of economic growth for 1969 and 1970; and if he will make a statement;

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will undertake to postpone the publication of the new National Plan until after the Budget statement.

The document which has been discussed in the National Economic Development Council will be published as a Green Paper on 26th February, when I hope to make a fuller statement.

Would the right hon. Gentleman like to leak to the House, before it leaks to the Press, what is the estimated growth rate which will be shown in the document? Will Members of Parliament be able to see some of the papers which were put in on which there was disagreement. I imagine that the document will have only agreed points.

The document to be put before the House will be substantially based on the successive discussions and documents that went to the N.E.D.C. This will provide the House with the information it wants and requires to continue its examination of planning and the prospects ahead. I am afraid that I cannot help the hon. Gentleman about the Press.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a lively interest has been created by the advance publicity for the publication of the document? Can we take it from him that all parties connected with it are agreed to its full publication?

The document is published by the Government and contains their assessment of the period covered by the document. However, the N.E.D.C. was perfectly content that it should be published.

Have the private sector figures been based on an expected growth rate indicated by the Government, or have the Government calculated the growth rate from the figures they have received from the private sector?

I understand the hon. Gentleman's interest in this, but since this is a complicated matter at the heart of the argument concerning the factors relevant to growth, it would be better if he waited until he saw the Green Paper next Wednesday.

Can we be reassured by the Minister that when publication comes next week it will still not be too late for ideas and views from the House to influence the basic policy assumptions in the document? Does the right hon. Gentleman recall that if the last National Plan had been presented a bit earlier to the House and the public it might have been possible for hon. Members to point out that the planners had omitted to plan for the balance of payments, and that there were other such omissions?

I am sure that in making its views known the House will contribute to the continuing planning process. As for the rigidity, as it were, of the document, I would only make the point that it is published as a Green Paper.

Why cannot the right hon. Gentleman answer the point of my hon. Friend the Member for Oswestry (Mr. Biffen)? The answer must be one or the other, or both. Can he tell us whether the plans have been based on previous input-output tables, or those which the House has not yet had an opportunity to see?

The only answer I can give the hon. Gentleman at present is that we have obviously had to take a view about growth based on past experience, but that we are carrying out a series of consultations with industry which will enable us to arrive at firmer figures than we now have.

Will my right hon. Friend bear in mind that an important aspect of the presentation of the Green Paper is that we be given a chance to look at it at the same time as the discussions are taking place on it? What has offended a number of hon. Members is that certain privileged positions are granted to those outside the House.

I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern about this. The real difficulty, as I think he knows, is that if we have a body like the N.E.D.C. set up precisely for this kind of consultative purpose, it is almost inevitable that at some stage there will be discussion first with it before the discussion is taken further forward into the forum of the House of Commons and elsewhere. Therefore, I cannot help my hon. Friend on that matter, but, as I have already said, it is a Green Paper and we expect a great deal of discussion on it.

The right hon. Gentleman referred just now to past experience. Is it too late for him, even now, to be warned by it and throw the filthy thing away?

I do not know which past experience I am being invited to look at. If it is the experience from 1951 to 1964, when there was so little economic planning in this country, I would not wish to repeat that experience.

My right hon. Friend referred in his original Answer to growth and development policy. Does he agree that in order to get the sort of growth the Government envisage it is important that they carry on with the development policy they are now pursuing?

The development area policy which I think is in my hon. Friend's mind is a very important part of the Government's total economic strategy and will make a contribution to national economic growth, which, in the absence of such policies, would be slower than it has been and will be.

My right hon. Friend made a statement in which he gave the official date when the publication will be made. This appeared in the Press a week ago and can only have been obtained from an official source. Will my right hon. Friend suggest that a Select Committee should be set up to investigate how that report came about?

I regret, as I think other hon. Members do, the apparent facility of the Press in getting information of this kind. But my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister dealt with this matter in Questions only two days ago.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will now make a progress report on the over-all planning progress of the Northern Region.

The Northern Economic Planning Council will shortly be publishing its proposals for an economic development strategy for the Northern Region. It also intends to publish a survey of the Region's ports and is working on a similar survey of educational facilities. An indication of current economic progress was given in my reply to my hon. Friend's Question of 19th December.—[Vol. 775, c. 429.]

The whole of the North-East will welcome the opportunity to examine proposals which may emerge in the suggested plan. Is my right hon. Friend aware that the experience of effective planning over recent years has not been too encouraging? Is he further aware that in South-East Northumberland, particularly in the Ashington-New-biggin-Broomhill area, there is urgent need for recognition that growth industry is the essential answer to our growing problem of unemployment? I hope that this will be taken into consideration in the plan.

Supplementary questions must be reasonably brief.

I agree with my hon. Friend about the need for growth industry. But I remind him that the amount of factory space approved in 1968 was about 12 million square feet for the Northern Region and was the largest amount in any one year since the I.D.C. system was introduced in 1948. I know that he will welcome, as I do, the figures produced today, which show that unemployment in the region fell by 2,175 between last month and this.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consider making resources available to the Economic Planning Council to enable it to sample public opinion on those aspects of planning proposals which intimately affect people's lives?

The Council is composed of people intimately acquainted with the lives of the people. Many of the members are also connected with the local authorities, and I am sure that they all bring their knowledge of people's lives to bear in their deliberations.

In his capacity as Minister responsible for the region, will my right hon. Friend undertake to pay an extended visit there in order to co-ordinate the activities of the various Government Departments concerned with employment? While we pay tribute to them, particularly the Board of Trade, we feel that the oversight of regional planning from his Department is essential.

I visit the area frequently. I am happy at the progress which members of the D.E.A. staff in Newcastle are able to make with their colleagues in other Departments. If my hon. Friend has any particular problems in mind I will communicate them to our people in Newcastle. I have the greatest confidence in the way they handle the problems.

Within the context of the Government's strategy, has the right hon. Gentleman any idea of increasing the number of special development areas to cover cases like Sunderland, which is suffering very heavy unemployment?

I agree about the problems of Sunderland, but at this stage it would be wrong, with the Hunt Report due, to look at the special development area status. But we are not unmindful of the point raised by the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs to what extent the Government's policies have reduced unemployment in the development areas since October 1964; and what has been the cost of the Government's preferential assistance to development areas since that date.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what estimates he has made of the effect of Government policies in reducing the relative level of unemployment in development areas in 1965, 1966, 1967 and 1968.

Five years ago unemployment in the development areas was more than double the national rate. Despite a major rundown in employment in mining and other traditional industries, the development area level has been lowered in relation to the national rate. The total cost of special assistance to development districts and areas from October 1964 up to the end of the last financial year was in the region of £325 million. The estimate for the current financial year is nearly £260 million.

Since the figures show that, for each of the development areas, the level of unemployment is now higher than in 1964, are the Government satisfied that the expenditure of £260 million a year represents value for the taxpayers money?

Yes, Sir. There is no doubt of the strong evidence of the success of the Government's policy in getting a greater inflow of new industry into the development areas. Last year, I.D.C. approvals represented a total of 72,000 additional jobs for the development areas. The comparable figures for 1961, 1962 and 1963 were respectively, 37,000, 24,000 and 36,000.

In discussion at Question Time with Ministers of the Board of Trade, some confusion has arisen over the definitions of new as against additional jobs. Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what these definitions are or whether the two terms are the same?

That is a different question and difficult to answer. Presumably the hon. Gentleman wishes to establish the cost, as it were, of providing a particular job. We have a means of costing new jobs provided from facilities under the Local Employment Act, but what we have not got is a means of adequately measuring the contributions of such measures as investment grants and the regional employment premium towards job creation.

Would not my right hon. Friend agree that the answer to whether this expenditure is justified lies in the fact that the tremendous rundown in coal mining, in the North-East in particular, would have resulted in a very much higher figure of unemployment otherwise, and that without this expenditure he would not have been able to report that the ratio between the North and the national average had been reduced as it has?

My hon. Friend is quite right. Given the accelerated rundown of the older industries in the development areas, only the most energetic regional policy, such as we have pursued, would have been adequate to meet the situation. By it, we have doubled the number of new jobs going to development areas through I.D.Cs. in the last four years, and this is an indication of our success.

In view of that unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I beg to give notice that I shall seek to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what is the result of his discussions with the North-West Economic Planning Council about the level of public investment in the North-West Region.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he has now had discussions with the North-West Economic Planning Council about the Council's Report entitled "Strategy II"; and if he will make a statement.

With other Ministers concerned, I had a full discussion of the major issues arising from the Council's report, including public investment, with the Chairman and other members of the Council on 23rd January. We are now considering the terms of the Government's reply which will be sent to the Council Chairman shortly.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, according to the Government's own figures, the value of orders placed by the public sector with the private sector for new construction per head of population in 1966 and 1967 in the North-West area was 20 per cent. and 17 per cent., respectively, below the national average? Did he discuss this matter with the Regional Planning Council and, if so, with what result?

I discussed the matter of relative public expenditure in the region with the chairman and his colleagues, and our comments will be in the document which we hope to publish before long as the normal reply to the Council's submission. There is, of course, a tremendous difficulty in dealing with figures which cover only part of total public expenditure, and there are other problems.

In view of the timetable of this matter, is not the procedure immensely dilatory? Does it not give rise to the question that is never far below the surface of our thoughts—just what does the D.E.A. actually do?

Among its other functions, it carries on the work of regional planning which was never embarked upon until 1964, when the Department was established.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that all good Lancastrians—particularly those involved in the Lancashire and Merseyside Industrial Development Association—know that the D.E.A. is doing excellent work and are grateful for the help it has and is giving.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that his recent visit to the North-West to meet the Economic Planning Council was much appreciated? Is he aware that there is growing concern in the North-West about differences in public expenditure per thousand of population there as compared with places like Scotland?

I am aware of that. As I have said, the difficulty here is to find a proper basis for making meaningful comparisons between public expenditure in the different regions.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what discussions he has had with the National Economic Development Council about methods of encouraging a higher rate of investment in industry; and with what result.

This subject has been discussed at recent meetings of the N.E.D.C. and the Government are engaged in a series of studies concerned with various aspects of investment policy.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that the real need in inducing industry to greater investment is to restore confidence in the future and to give assurance that there will be no more of the freezes and squeezes which have done so much harm in the last four years?

Confidence is, of course, an important factor in investment, but no doubt it has not escaped the hon. Gentleman's attention that the C.B.I. Report out today indicates a very substantial increase in expected investment during the coming year.

Notwithstanding that Report, has my right hon. Friend seen Mr. Fred Catherwood's recent remarks that, unless this country steps up the level of investment markedly in the early future, technologically we shall miss the bus in the 1970s? Does not my right hon. Friend agree that one foundation for investment is a sustained economic growth of about 6 per cent. this year, next year and henceforward?

Economic growth is a very important factor in investment, and investment is increasing during this coming year. In a sense, Mr. Catherwood's remarks seem to have anticipated what may now be happening.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs upon what annual rate of growth of gross national product are the nationalised industries to base their investment plans for the future.

The nationalised industries' current investment plans are consistent with an assumed average growth of gross domestic product of 3 to 3¼ per cent. a year for the next five years. Future plans will have regard to the Government's latest views on prospects for economic growth.

Why has it taken this Question to smoke out from the Government what is the rate of economic growth enshrined in their miserable document which they have not even got the guts to publish?

The hon. Gentleman would make as poor a detective as he does an economist. I advise him to study the way in which the programmes of nationalised industries are rolled forward year by year. These figures were given to them provisionally a year ago, and their future programmes, in rolling forward, will accommodate the new figures.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, in view of the fact that payments for regional development are now running at over £250 million per annum, if he will give an undertaking to take steps to prevent this expenditure from further increasing.

No, Sir, but, as we have made clear, the Government are determined to keep total public expenditure under strict control.

Does the right hon. Gentleman now accept the figure of £250 million a year which the Under-Secretary of State vehemently denied last time he answered Questions?

I am not quite certain of the definition of the sum the hon. Gentleman is referring to. If he is talking about the size of the sum of the money going into development area policy, that is obviously very near the mark,

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that a great deal of good which results from this expenditure could be increased further if the money were applied more selectively within the development areas?

I am always very interested in proposals to increase the effectiveness of development area policy. If my hon. Friend has any suggestions to make for making it more selective and more effective, I should be glad to hear them.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that, as the view in Scotland in this matter is that we can no longer afford the luxury of partnership with England, which is bankrupt, and as the view in England, which is becoming clear in this House, is that Scotland is getting a hand-out, the solution to economic growth would be to get rid of Scotland and let her paddle her own canoe?

I will not comment on the last part of the hon. Lady's remarks. I am surprised that apparently she is unable to recognise the very considerable improvement taking place in the Scottish economy, some part of which is certainly due to the Government's development area policy.

Will my right hon. Friend totally reject both the propositions made by the hon. Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley) and by the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mrs. Ewing)? Is he aware that in Lanarkshire we are delighted indeed with the very great help that has been given by the Government through the development area policy?

I thank my right hon. Friend for her support of our policy. I can certainly give her the assurance she asks for. Inevitably public expenditure on development area policy is bound to increase up to a point in simply reflecting the success of that policy. In other words, if more firms invest in development areas there will be greater public expenditure on that account.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will undertake a study of the means of identifying disparities in the rate of public expenditure per head of population between different economic regions.

No, Sir. Public expenditure per head of population is a misleading measure of the benefits of the totality of public expenditure to any region.

I accept that there must and will be variations between regions, but is not this a statistical field of real significance? If the hon. Gentleman's Department is to justify its continued existence, should it not undertake this study and not shy away from its complexity?

The hon. Gentleman is in some difficulty about the allocation, bearing in mind that that expenditure per head is distinctly misleading, particularly as the available figures are limited to expenditure on new construction only. The expenditure per head is misleading for a number of reasons. It is not allocated on this basis and in many cases the benefits of the expenditure are not limited to any single region.

Would my hon. Friend agree that expenditure in neighbouring regions is also beneficial to the North-West—for example, the money being spent to extend the M62 from Stretford into Yorkshire?

My hon. Friend is right. Expenditure incurred in the region on road construction produces benefits outside the region.

Would the hon. Gentleman think again about this matter? It is time that we had some comparisons. We in Lancashire feel that we are being let down. If we are not, it would be to the Government's advantage to prove it.

Public expenditure is not allocated to the regions. The money is spent on policy objectives and projects based on an assessment of priorities. For example, much of the expenditure on defence is administered on a national basis and has no specific regional element.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will set up an independent inquiry to investigate the cost-effectiveness of the Government's regional economic policies.

No, Sir.

What evidence on this subject has the Department submitted to the Hunt Committee, and will the hon. Gentleman publish it?

It is not the responsibility of my Department to submit evidence to the Hunt Committee. The evidence is submitted by a number of bodies, and we shall consider the recommendations as soon as we have them.

Since the Government are giving to private enterprise subsidies in one form or another of between £6,000 and £10,000 for every new job it creates in the regions, would my hon. Friend study the cost effectiveness of starting selective public enterprises in the regions—or is that ruled out precisely because it was the policy of the Labour Party to which my hon. Friend, in a previous incarnation, made such a notable contribution?

I assure my hon. Friend that the matter to which he refers is not by any means ruled out, but he will appreciate that there are certain practical problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on the Humberside Feasibility Report.

No, Sir, not before the report has been published.

Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the planning development of Humberside has been held up for four years by a series of commissions and inquiries? Now that he has the report for publication he says that he will consult local authorities and test public opinion. What local authorities, and how can he test public opinion if the public do not know what is in the report?

It is a matter of waiting until the report is published. I must resist the suggestion that work and planning in the Humberside area has been affected or delayed by waiting for the report. The report will deal with a pattern of growth from 1981 onwards.

Does my right hon. Friend appreciate that we have been waiting for this report on Humberside for a long, long time and that there is positive stagnation in industry on Humberside with the perpetual threat of decline in future? The report is urgently awaited by local authorities, industrialists and the workers who are threatened with the loss of their jobs.

I understand my hon. Friend's interest and concern that the report should be published as soon as possible. It will be published within three or four months of the time when it was received in December.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what proposals he has for increasing the resources available to the North-West Economic Planning Council.

My right hon. Friend has no proposals at the present time for an increase in the staff available to the Council. Regional staffing is reviewed, as necessary, in the light of work-loads and the resources available.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the Chairman and members of the North-West Economic Planning Council are doing an excellent job in guiding Government investment and showing ways in which Lancashire, Cheshire and the North-West generally can help themselves? Will he give them all the encouragement he can?

I can give my hon. Friend the promise for which he asks. I should like to take this opportunity of paying tribute to the excellent work of the Planning Council and of its Chairman, Sir William Mather. I should also like to point out that the extremely good relations flowing from this work are of benefit to the Planning Council and to the area in general.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the pronouncements of this Manchester-based Council are not always very acceptable in Liverpool? Would he indicate to the distinguished chairman that he should always ensure that his favours are distributed entirely impartially between the two cities?

I am sure that not only the chairman but the members of the Council are absolutely fair in their approach to the many problems with which they have to deal. I am equally certain that no discrimination is practised as between Liverpool and Manchester or any other part of the region.

On a point of order. May I point out that the present leader of the Conservative-controlled Liverpool City Council is a senior member of the Northwest Economic Planning Council and, so far as I know, has agreed with all its planning and publications?

That is not a point of order.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what proposals he has for an economic development committee for the City of London.

Following discussion in the National Economic Development Council, the Director-General of N.E.D.O. is examining with the interested parties the possible rôle of, and support for, an E.D.C. for Banking, Insurance and Finance. The Council will consider the matter further in the light of the outcome of this examination.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that on this subject, as on so many others, Lord Cromer has offered excellent advice? He has suggested that such a committee is quite unnecessary. Would the right hon. Gentleman take this opportunity of nipping in the bud this possible extension of unnecessary bureaucracy and public expense?

I must look at Lord Cromer's advice on this.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs, when he now expects the Hunt Committee to report to him.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he now expects to receive the report of the Hunt Committee on the grey areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he now expects a report from the Hunt Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he has now received the report of the Hunt Committee on grey areas; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will now give a firm date for the publication of the Report of the Hunt Committee.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will now announce the date of publication of the Report of the Hunt Committee.

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

I expect to receive it later today and I shall arrange for its publication at the earliest possible date. In the meantime, Ministers will be closely considering the report so that the necessary consultations may be carried through and decisions announced without undue delay.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that uncertainty is the enemy of investment? Is it correct that there is a minority report inside the major report?

I would advise my hon. Friend to await the publication of the report. I understand his concern about uncertainty. That is why we are trying to arrange for the most rapid publication and discussion of the report possible.

But would the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that if the report, as seems almost inevitable, criticises fundamentally the Government's regional policy he will observe the report rather than stick slavishly to his previous policy?

Should there be criticism of the kind which the hon. Gentleman suggests, clearly I would have to consider it. My mind is not closed, and I will consider whatever evidence is put to me.

Could my right hon. Friend say why the report has been so long delayed, although we shall welcome its publication?

I understand the natural impatience of hon. Members to get the report as soon as we set up a committee to undertake a study. But I cannot accept that there has undue delay in this case. The Hunt Committee has had only 18 months to study a very substantial area of the country which no Government has previously examined. This is bound to take time.

In view of the low average wages prevailing in Norfolk, the greyest of grey areas, instead of replying airily about the publication of the Hunt Committee's Report, will my right hon. Friend consider the anxiety and urgency with which rescue from the Government is needed in Norfolk and other areas?

Those anxieties for the first time have had the opportunity of being heard and discussed in a serious way before the Hunt Committee. I have no doubt that the Committee has thoroughly examined the points put to it.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the Edinburgh Leith area, which has been a grey area, is now being bled white because more than 40 firms have closed down or moved, and has he looked at a map of Scotland, which the Government have now made into a modernistic sculpture with a hole in the middle?

The hon. Gentleman's description of the problems in Edinburgh is, to say the least, somewhat exaggerated, but evidence of Edinburgh's problems has been fully presented to the Hunt Committee.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that North-East Lancashire expects a very honourable mention in the Report, and that the announcement of the new town makes help for North-East Lancashire even more urgent? Will he act on any recommendation in the Hunt Report that increased help should be given to North-East Lancashire?

I know that the problems of North-East Lancashire have been thoroughly studied by the Hunt Committee. I point out to my hon. Friend the welcome change, compared with a year ago, in the unemployment position in the North-East Lancashire area. I cannot at the moment say what the conclusions of the Hunt Committee are, but my hon. Friend can be assured that the Hunt Committee has been considering very carefully the position of North-East Lancashire.

Will the Minister heed the heartfelt plea by his hon. Friend the Member for Yarmouth (Dr. Gray) that the people in this country be rescued from this Government?

On a point of order. I did not say that. I support the Government.

Order. We are moving too much in the grey areas.

My right hon. Friend said that the Report of the Hunt Committee would be published as soon as possible, but, since the Report may have an effect on development policy, will he be more specific and say how soon?

I hope that the Report will be published in six to eight weeks' time. That is the earliest time in which we are able to get it printed.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what estimate he has made of changes in output and productivity in manufacturing industry as a result of the introduction of British Standard Time.

As I explained on 19th December, a few months' experience does not provide a valid basis for a firm assessment.

Surely the Under-Secretary must have figures of any increase or decrease available. Is it not painfully obvious that this absurd experiment should come to an end as soon as possible?

I am afraid that the information is not available, and could not possibly be available. We would first have to take into account whether this was a typical winter and, secondly, the transitional arrangements that industry, and particularly the construction industry, has to undertake to accommodate to a new situation.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he will announce the Government's policy to wards the first report of the East Anglia Economic Planning Council.

As I said in the debate on the East Anglia Planning Council's Report in the House on 29th January, my right hon. Friend and other Ministers concerned will be meeting the Council on 3rd March. The Government's reply to the report will be sent to the Council as soon as possible afterwards.

Will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind in these discussions and in framing Government policy that many individuals and organisations in the area believe that the Council's report laid insufficient stress on the need to improve East-West road communications in the middle and the northern parts of East Anglia?

This point can certainly be borne in mind, but many other bodies made representations in addition to the representations made by the Planning Council. I am not certain whether this point was made in those representations, but it can receive attention at the appropriate time.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on his official visit to Bath gate.

I have nothing to add to the reply given to my hon. Friend on 19th December by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster.

When my right hon. Friend went to Bathgate, did he notice the remarkably improved industrial conditions in that part of Scotland, which are the direct result of the development policies of this Government, and will he reconsider the matter of tolls?

I am always prepared to hear from my hon. Friend on the subject of tolls. I was struck by the confident atmosphere which existed in Bathgate, and I was glad to see it and the improvement associated with it in the area.