asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will publish details of the projects to create additional employment in development areas during the winter months for which expenditure of £10 million was authorised on 15th October, 1968; and how many additional jobs were created in such projects.

Details of expenditure on the main types of project in Scotland and the Northern Region were given in the reply by my hon. Friend, the Minister of State, to the hon. Member for Hamilton (Mrs. Ewing) on 3rd December, 1968.—[Vol. 774, c. 456.] I will circulate corresponding details for Wales in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The programme was expected to provide roughly some 8,000 jobs.

Is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that this expenditure serves its purpose and is justified?

It succeeded in providing a useful number of additional jobs in areas where unemployment was exceptionally high.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he expects to be in a position to make his further statement on the Government's regional policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will now make a statement on the boundaries of the intermediate areas in Yorkshire and Humberside.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will now state which areas of Yorkshire and Humberside are to be scheduled for special assistance on the lines of the Hunt Committee's Report.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he intends to announce the exact boundaries of the intermediate areas which will enjoy special assistance in accordance with the decisions of the Government on the Hunt Report.

I would refer the hon. Gentleman to my statement yesterday.—[Vol. 785, c. 1506–8.]

The Secretary of State repeated yesterday his undertaking that the R.E.P. would not be withdrawn for seven years. Does this mean, in effect, that, in that time, the size of the development areas cannot be reduced?

It means exactly what I said—that the R.E.P. will be paid for seven years to firms in the existing development areas.

The Government's measures were keenly awaited in Hull, and they have not disappointed us. We are particularly happy that the building grants will apply to us in the North-East, since we can now go ahead on a fairly even basis.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend. We are, of course, aware of the problems of the Hull and North Humberside area, and these additional intermediate area proposals will be of great assistance to it.

While we welcome the speed with which my right hon. Friend has decided this important matter, the exclusion of certain authorities from intermediate region status will create serious anomalies, in that they are economically integral parts of the regions which the Hunt Committee studied, but will not be in a third-class category vis-à-vis the development areas and the new intermediate areas. My right hon. Friend is creating more anomalies than he is solving.

It is one of the inevitable consequences of any kind of regional policy in which one creates development areas or intermediate areas that there will be those which are included and those which are excluded, but we have taken into account the claims of other towns in the Yorkshire intermediate area, particularly Sheffield. I assure my hon. Friend that we concluded that the outlook for that city was sufficiently promising not to justify inclusion at present.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs (1) what effect he estimates the Government's proposal to meet the cost of the new help for the intermediate areas from within the total assistance to the development areas will have on development in the regions;

Our proposals are intended to encourage the expansion of existing industry in the intermediate areas and to attract some new industry there. The development areas will continue to offer more powerful and varied incentives and the diversion effects should not be great.

Can the right hon. Gentleman reply in any other form to the supplementary question put by my hon. Friend the Member for Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker) just now? Does his reply mean that every firm which now enjoys the regional employment premium will continue to enjoy it for the next seven years? This assurance is even more important now than it was before the right hon. Gentleman made his announcement yesterday. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a genuine fear in the North-East that the measures announced yesterday may detract somewhat from the employment position of the North-East, which is serious?

Order. Long supplementaries mean fewer Questions.

In reply to the first part of the supplementary question, I would add that the regional employment premium will go on for seven years as from the date of its introduction in 1967. I hope this makes the position clear. Of course I understand the worries in the North-East but I must, as the hon. Member knows from his experience of a West Riding constituency, weigh the problems of development areas against the emerging problems of other parts of the country, and I have tried to be fair.

While appreciating my right hon. Friend's wish to assist intermediate areas, may I ask whether he does not agree that the extension of the limit within which industrial development certificates were previously held will have a detrimental effect particularly on the North-East in view of the number of footloose industries still about in that area?

It was our concern for development areas which led the Government to the conclusion that we should not raise the limit for exemption from I.D.C. control from 3,000 to 5,000 feet.

How many fewer jobs does the right hon. Gentleman estimate will be created in development areas as a result of his announcement?

It is impossible to get such an estimate at the present time but, given the geographical situation of a number of intermediate areas, there is the distinct possibility that some Midland or London firms which would not have gone to development areas will be attracted to the new intermediate areas.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that in development areas where there are dwindling industries, particularly areas with mine closures which are coming regularly, there is great fear that the announcement he made yesterday will detract from the attraction of new industries to development areas? Can he give a much more positive assurance that this will not happen?

I appreciate my right hon. Friends concern, but I remind her that it was partly to anticipate the specially severe problems of the rundown of the coal industry that we declared a number of special development areas in the autumn of 1967, which will be a very material and helpful factor.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what studies are at present being carried out by his Department of the United Kingdom propensity to import and of possible measures of import restraint; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement about the consideration by the National Economic Development Council at its meeting on 4th June of methods of controlling the rise in imports.

The United Kingdom propensity to import and possible additional action to promote import saving are matters which are studied by my Department in the course of carrying out its general economic responsibilities. The National Economic Development Council is to resume its consideration of exports and imports, including import saving, at its meeting on 2nd July.

Has the right hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to the article in the current issue of the Review of Economic Statistics by Messrs. Houthakker and Magee, which argues that the income elasticity of demand for United Kingdom imports is very much higher than the income elasticity demand for United Kingdom exports? What is his view of that argument?

This is, of course, one of the many studies which are being made of import propensities of the United Kingdom, both in the period before devaluation and in the period after. What we are trying now to assess is the change in import propensity since devaluation, but we cannot yet get a reliable estimate of the change in this still relatively short period.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that, if the import deposits scheme ends on 5th November, as is the Government's intention, there will be a slowing down of orders for goods to be imported from now until December, with a major build up in December, January and February. What action do the Government intend to take about this and will they ensure that, in the interpretation of statistics, they take this into account?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is exaggerating both the effects of the hold up of goods by the import deposits scheme and, therefore, the consequential speed-up of imports which might follow the ending of the scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he has received the report on the three-year study of regional economic development and policy sponsored by his Department and being carried out by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research; and whether he has taken the results of this study into account in reaching his decisions on the recommendations of the Hunt Committee.

No, Sir. My right hon. Friend has not yet received the report referred to, because work on it is still in progress but it is expected to be completed early in 1970.

Was any part of this Report taken into account before the Secretary of State's statement on the Hunt Committee's Report? Does the hon. Gentleman consider this Report to be part of the policy of constant review or a separate and independent review?

Professor Brown, who leads the National Institute team, was also a member of the Hunt Committee and it may be supposed that his research into fundamental issues for the National Institute will be in line with his contribution to the Hunt Committee. As far as I am concerned, his Report is independent.

Is my hon. Friend aware of the findings of the new report on regional earnings and regional policy? Will he ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he will take into account the level of wages in an area, like, for example, the Potteries, when making decisions about the granting of industrial development certificates?

I take note of that point and will see that my right hon. Friend the President of the Board of Trade is advised of it.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs when he estimates his Department will have sufficient experience of the effects of development area measures on the problems of the development areas to enable a review of the measures to be held.

I keep a close watch on all regional measures, but a special review of development area policy would be premature.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that to spend hundreds of millions of pounds annually on development areas without having any idea of the return on the money or the number of new jobs created is nonsensical? Cannot we get this review under way with much more urgency than his reply indicates in order to make sure that we are getting value for money?

I repeat what I have said on a number of occasions—that the new measures we have introduced for development areas are of very recent origin and that both the differential investment grants and the regional employment premium only began to be paid out in autumn 1967. I do not want to embark on a premature review which would be fruitless and lead to inaccurate conclusions.

Does not my right hon. Friend agree that one of the things he could do to review the cost of the development area proposals is to consider the descheduling of some of the areas in the development areas which are, on the evidence of the Hunt Committee, nothing like as bad as either intermediate areas or those areas which have not been included in either? I speak in particular of the North Riding.

I am not aware that the Hunt Committee recommended that any particular parts of development areas should be descheduled. It recommended that we should embark upon a review. There is here a real danger of having an unsettling effect on industry. We have a momentum now behind development area policy and I should be reluctant to take action that might cause it to falter.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what revision he has made, following the discussions with the International Monetary Fund, of the estimates for our balance of trade and balance of payments made in his planning document "The Task Ahead"; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he will now revise his planning document. "The Task Ahead," in the light of the estimated balance of payments for the forthcoming year.

The medium-term payments objective specified in "The Task Ahead" is not affected by any of the factors mentioned in the hon. Members' Questions.

But as the planning of the document "The Task Ahead" was based on a desired payments surplus of £500 million, and as the Chancellor said yesterday that he thought a surplus of only £300 million to be obtainable, has not one of the assumptions on which the document was based altered and do not other things follow from that?

The hon. Gentleman and I had a similar exchange shortly after the Budget statement. The point I made then was that both the Chancellor, in his short-term forecast and in his Budget speech, and I in my medium term assessment, made the same point—that we need a substantial and continuing surplus of about £500 million a year. What we did not say in the medium-term assessment was the precise year in which we expected this target to be achieved.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many of us believe that he is hundreds of millions of pounds wrong in his assessment? Would it not be better to leave planning to the I.M.F. or the Treasury and liquidate his Department?

The important thing is on which side of the forecast we are likely to be wrong. It is possible to take a somewhat more optimistic view than the obvious pessimism implicit in the hon. Gentleman's rather silly question.

Speaking from bitter experience, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he does not agree that leaving it to the Treasury is bound to make it even worse?

My right hon. Friend the Member for Belper (Mr. George Brown), who speaks with unrivalled experience of these matters, will agree that obviously the best course is to leave it neither to the Treasury nor to the Department of Economic Affairs but to the combined effort of the two.

While the right hon. Gentleman did not specify a year in which he thought the objective was likely to be achieved, does not he agree, after the agreement debated yesterday, that it is likely to be at least a year later than it would otherwise have been?

I see no reason to draw that conclusion. Our objective is to get a substantial and continuing surplus as soon as possible.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what is the present total staff of his Department; and how this compares with February, 1965.

547 compared with 316.

Is the Minister satisfied that the work of his Department could not be done with fewer than this?

Yes, I am. I do not know why the hon. Gentleman selected that date but, as he will realise, the Department of Economic Affairs was three months old at that time, and was grossly understaffed in relation to the responsibilities which it had then assumed and which it continues to exercise. Implicit in what the hon. Gentleman said, and explicit in the remarks of several other hon. and right hon. Gentlemen, is a continuing campaign against the Depart- ment of Economic Affairs and, in particular, and much resented, against the unusually talented and hardworking civil servants who man it. I resent this, and look upon it as being entirely politically motivated. I am quite prepared to have hon. and right hon. Gentlemen saying what they like about me, but they are being destructive and silly in their attacks upon a Department which, inevitably, is not in the front line of publicity but is a planning and policy Department which has contributed a very great deal to the development of policy in this country.

Order. Long answers mean fewer Questions.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs how many members of the South-West Regional Council are normally resident in Dorset.

Two, Sir.

In view of the finding of the Redcliffe-Maud Report, is it not obvious that Dorset looks very much more to the South-East and to the counties in this region than to the North? Is not the representation quite inadequate, and will his Department take a little more interest in Dorset?

Members of economic planning councils are not chosen to represent areas or even county districts. They are chosen because of the benefits which they can bring through their experience to economic planning generally within the region. I do not think I can usefully add anything on the Redcliffe-Maud Report to what the Prime Minister said in his statement on 11th June.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what consultations he has had with organisations in the North-West regarding the provision of economic aid to that region.

Following my statement on 24th April, I have consulted the North-West Economic Planning Council about our proposed new measures of assistance to the region and the precise boundaries of the North-East Lancashire intermediate area. I have also received representations from a number of local authorities and other bodies in the region, whose views I have carefully considered.—[Vol. 782, c. 668–72.]

Is my right hon. Friend aware that we in the North-West fully appreciate the massive aid which has been given by the Government to the region? Bearing in mind the likely advantages and disadvantages of aid based on geographical areas—either intermediate or development area—will he give an assurance that the more delicate mechanism of housing, urban renewal and this kind of development is given full consideration?

The problems of communications and urban renewal are just as important in the development of regional planning as specific incentives and aid to industry. I assure my hon. Friend that full weight is given to these factors in allocating public expenditure and in regional planning.

May I further embarrass my right hon. Friend by congratulating him on the aid which he has given to North-East Lancashire, and particularly to my constituency, which is greatly welcomed? Will he ask his right hon. Friends to publicise the great advantages to industrialists of development and expansion in the North-East Lancashire region?

My hon. Friend will recall that we went as far as we could in yesterday's statement in announcing the immediacy of the measures which we had introduced. Our purpose is to engage the interests of industrialists at the earliest moment.

If the economic position generally is as rosy as the Chancellor made out yesterday, why is it that hon. Members on both sides of the House are continually complaining of poverty and unemployment in their own districts?

That is a very interesting question which shows that the hon. Gentleman has not thought at all about regional policy. The plain truth is that it is possible to have periods of national prosperity coupled with regional depressions, and we had this for many years under the Governments of right hon. Gentlemen opposite.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what criteria he has decided should be applied to the level of employment to be provided to qualify for the employment-linked 25 per cent. building grant in the intermediate areas.

The same criteria as are applied under the Local Employment Acts in relation to building grants in development areas.

Will the Minister of State make absolutely clear in his statements and in the publications of his Department that the Government's proposed building grants which are linked with employment differ fundamentally from and fall far short of the recommendation of the Hunt Committee, which was that all industrial building of a capital nature should receive building grants?

This is an entirely different question. There is no evidence to justify the hon. Gentleman's criticism about falling short of the Hunt Committee's recommendation. Had we accepted the Hunt Committee's recommendation, we should have been guilty of a complete departure of policy in relation to the 25 per cent. building grant as it has always been related to job provision within the development areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what means are employed by his Department to ascertain the effect of the regional employment premium as an instrument of development area policies.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will make a statement on the operation of regional employment premium in relation to Scotland.

I keep a close watch on all the regional incentives. R.E.P. is a comparatively new measure, but I am considering possible means of inquiring into its effect on industry and employment.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that many of us who are conscious of the problems of development areas welcome his proposal to investigate the efficacy of this unselective and undiscriminating hand-out across the board? Does not he consider that, if this is a bad way of bringing industry to the development areas, the earlier we find out the better and, similarly, if it is a good way, the earlier we find out the better?

I would agree with my hon. Friend that we want to get accurate information about the effects of particular measures and the sooner the better. I think the whole House would agree with that. When he describes this measure as undiscriminating, he must remember that in two very important ways it is discriminating. It is discriminating in terms of the areas to which it applies, and it is discriminating in terms of its application to manufacturing industry.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that our suspicion is that R.E.P. has not had a very beneficial effect on employment in Scotland, and will he isolate the figures?

I would very much like to do so but, as I have said before, the difficulty is that we have had less than two years' experience of it and inevitably it is an incentive whose effect, assuming that it has the effect we want, is bound to be a cumulative and growing one.

Has the Secretary of State closed his mind entirely to the important and fundamental recommendation of the Hunt Committee that there should be a comprehensive review of development area policies here and now?

It is obvious from what I said that my mind is far from closed. I cannot have an inquiry into policies until I have some reason to believe that their effects can be measured, and that time has not yet come.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the figures which were given in a Written Answer on Tuesday by the Department of Employment and Productivity which show that male unemployment in the special development areas is growing very rapidly? Does not that rapid increase suggest a failure of the Government's policies, including the regional employment premiums, to do the job which they were meant to do, and should not he therefore apply a new policy—for example, the policy of the Labour Party which he did so much to devise?

The special development areas, as their name implies, have problems which are especially acute, and the designation of special development areas started only in November, 1967. I do not take the pessimistic view of my hon. Friend as to the effect of the policies. As to other policies, I think that my hon. Friend is referring to the use of public sector industry as well as private industry in development areas, and I am as anxious as he is to employ the public sector in producing jobs in development areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs if he will now commission a study of the effects of the regional employment premium on shipbuilding firms outside the development areas.

No, Sir.

Why not?

Because, added to the general difficulties which I have already listed in making an examination of R.E.P. at this stage, there is the particular difficulty of analysing its effects on shipbuilding firms, not merely in the development areas but also outside them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is obviously an unfair discrimination against extremely efficient firms in the South. It has gone on too long and is giving an advantage to marginal firms in other parts of the country which, in the long term, is of no benefit to shipbuilding as a whole.

It is the nature and purpose of R.E.P. to discriminate in favour of manufacturing firms in development areas. This raises a matter of the principle of the R.E.P. itself. But there is no reason to believe that either the Vosper Thornycroft Group in Southampton or Brooke Marine in Lowestoft are suffering from the effects of competition with firms receiving R.E.P.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what further action the Government plan to take following their reply to the first report of the South East Economic Planning Council, "A Strategy for the South-East".

As I said in reply to the Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Faversham (Mr. Boston) on 8th May, the council's long-term strategy proposals for the region are being tested and followed up by the South-East Joint Planning Study.—[Vol. 783, c. 639–40.]

Is the Minister aware that his Order and counter-Order on the town of Ipswich have brought complete disorder to planning in North-East Essex, and will he state as soon as possible the consequences on planning of the Order not to go ahead with the new town of Ipswich?

The decision announced the other day by my right hon. Friend does not mean that growth in Ipswich will not continue. The new town proposal will not be proceeded with, but Ipswich has a strong potential for growth and there is no reason why growth should not take place there.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what consultation he has had with the North Regional Planning Committee about the Northern Economic Planning Council's statement, Northern Region, an Outline Strategy of Development to 1981.

None, Sir. but I understand that the Northern Economic Planning Council discussed its outline strategy in draft with the Committee and that the two bodies meet again soon.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that that is a little disappointing and that he should realise that this Council was superimposed in a region upon many very valuable regional organisations? Will he see that these valuable authoritative organisations are brought fully into the consideration of regional problems?

By all means. As I have indicated, there was discussion between the two bodies, and I understand that further discussions will take place. We have just had a request for a meeting on general regional policy with the Committee, and we shall consider that favourably.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs what action he is taking pursuant to the Northern Regional Economic Planning Council's proposals on outline strategy for development to 1981.

The important proposals contained in the Planning Council's Report are being carefully examined and the Government's views on them will be made known in due course.

Following my earlier supplementary Question, will my right hon. Friend consider the possibility of the Council promoting a conference on the widest manageable basis so that there may be a full discussion within the region of this Report and its implications?

That sounds a pretty good suggestion. Certainly I will put it to the Council.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he has now received any official representations on the recommendations of the Hunt Report from the National Coal Board.

No, Sir. But my right hon. Friends the Minister for Housing and Local Government and the Minister of Power keep in close touch with the National Coal Board about the services of the Opencast Executive in local authority land reclamation schemes. This was, of course, considered by the Hunt Committee.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that his specific reference to using the Opencast Executive of the Coal Board for clearing derelict land in his statement yesterday is greatly welcomed? Will he proceed further and initiate discussions with a view to creating a national land reclamation agency?

The difficulty with a national reclamation agency is the distinction between the two functions—the planning function and the executive function. If one thinks in terms of planning, I do not think that a national agency could take over what is essentially a task of the local authorities. They must plan not only the priorities of reclamation, but also the use of the land, within the context of their general planning proposals. As for executive help in clearing land, landscaping and grass planting, the Opencast Executive has immense experience, and we can do no more than urge local authorities to make full use of it.

asked the Secretary of State for Economic Affairs whether he is satisfied that the gross dividend of £750,000 paid by the Industrial Reorganisation Corporation on its public dividend capital of £31 million in the financial year 1968–69 represents an adequate return in present conditions; and if he will make a statement.

The I.R.C.'s primary task is to promote industrial reorganisation to the benefit of the United Kingdom economy, not to make substantial profits I am well satisfied with the dividend for 1968–69, and with the fact that the I.R.C. has achieved profitability a year earlier than expected.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say how much more of this artificially cheap trafficking is to be put at the disposal of the I.R.C. in the current year? Should not this matter be brought to the attention of the International Monetary Fund?

I.R.C. expenditure is programmed in the Estimates in the normal way, as with other bodies.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Questions such as that which we have just heard from the hon. Member for Walsall, South (Sir H. d'Avigdor-Goldsmid) misrepresent the rôle and function of the I.R.C., which is intended to restructure industry? Is he further aware, therefore, that we on this side of the House welcome everything done in this way?

I thank my hon. Friend for his remarks. I would remind hon. Gentlemen opposite who have doubts about the effectiveness of the I.R.C. that they have only to read its second Annual Report to see an immense record of achievement in restructuring vital sections of British industry.

asked the Postmaster-General if he will make a statement about the design of the proposed new building for the Bristol Central Telephone Exchange in relation to the views of the Royal Fine Art Commission, details of which are in his possession.

Planning clearance was sought from the local planning authority. I understand that the authority took into account the views of the Royal Fine Art Commission and the public and considered a number of alternative designs. It has given planning clearance for a design incorporating a 300 ft. slender tower.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Bristol is an ancient and beautiful city? Does not he feel that he has some obligation in this respect when proposing new tall buildings? In view of the objections of the Royal Fine Art Commission and those of many sections of local opinion, will not he look into the matter again and order or ask for a public inquiry?

I am well aware of the great attractions of Bristol. I am also aware that there is very severe congestion during peak hours, particularly on telephonic routes to Bristol. We want to deal with that by the erection of some construction which will enable communications to improve. I am satisfied that the planning authority has gone into this with great care, that there is no need for any additional inquiry, and that this is the best decision.

asked the Postmaster-General what is the present position in regard to providing television programmes in colour for Aberdeenshire.

B.B.C.2, in colour, is already available in Aberdeenshire; the duplicate services of B.B.C.1 and independent television, also in colour, are expected to start in 1971 and to be available to viewers who can now receive B.B.C.2.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what is the present number of workers in the Merseyside Development Area for whom the regional employment premium is paid to employers; what was the comparable number 12 months ago; and what has been the total sum so far paid under this head within the development area.

On 30th November, 1968, and 30th November, 1967, respectively there were 339,000 and 304,000 persons employed in establishments in the Merseyside Development Area registered for regional payments including the regional employment premium.

These figures reflect the position in establishments registered at the date of the count. They do not include all eligible establishments since they take no account of belated applications which were subsequently accepted. The difference between the two figures cannot therefore be taken to represent the full extent of any increase in employment in manufacturing industries in the area.

Between 4th September, 1967, when regional employment premium became available, and 31st March, 1969, about £24 million was paid in regional employment premium to employers in the Merseyside Development Area.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is a relatively high proportion of Merseyside workers employed in service industries? In view of the character of R.E.P., is the objective of this hand-out to restructure industry on Merseyside or to gain the maximum possible employment on Merseyside?

I think that it has both objects in part. But, irrespective of its success in achieving these supplementary objects, I think that my hon. Friend will conclude from the figures that I have just quoted that it has played a substantial part in improving the general employment prospects in the area.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will publish regularly a cost-of-living index containing information on insurance, mortgage repayments, taxation and other matters which are excluded from the Index of Retail Prices.

No. Changes in indirect taxes which are reflected in changes in the retail prices of goods and services are already included in the official indices of retail prices.

Changes in direct taxes, insurance and mortgage repayments have been excluded on the recommendation of the Cost of Living Advisory Committee.

Information about the incidence of these items is available from other published sources, including the annual reports on the Family Expenditure Survey.

Since it is officially admitted that the accuracy of the present index is widely doubted, would it not be better to replace it by a real, comprehensive, and credible cost-of-living index?

The admission to which the hon. Gentleman refers was in fact made by me and I am prepared to repeat it this afternoon. One reason why its accuracy is doubted is because people believe it to be an indication of movements in the cost of living when in fact it is a series of indices which are much more precise and are intended to do a rather different job from the one that the hon. Gentleman suggests.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether there is any intention to publish any kind of cost-of-living index for Scotland? After 18 months of hints that such a disclosure may be made at any moment, is it not time to say yes or no to a request for such vital statistics?

I told the hon. Lady some months ago that there are substantial technical problems about producing regional indices. The fact that those problems exist is exemplified by the evidence that she presents in that she has not explained the nature of the indices she would like to see and whether they should compare regional differences or movements over time in every region.

As the hon. Gentleman has already agreed that the existing Index does not fully reflect the cost of living of pensioners and has promised a new Index for that, may I ask when we may expect it?

It was published a week ago and a full account appeared this morning in The Times.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what were the increases in the index of retail prices for nationalised industries, for food, for housing, for fuel and light, for durable household goods, for clothing and footwear, for transport and

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity if she will broaden the membership and understanding of the Cost of Living Advisory Committee by adding to it some consumers' representatives, more trade union representatives, and at least two housewives from the middle and lower income groups.

As the reply contains a table of figures, I will, with permission, circulate a statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I thank the hon. Gentleman for that reply. Will he confirm that the greatest increases in prices since October, 1964, are in the nationalised industry, housing and service sectors, all directly due to Government policy, and that these will be exacerbated by rises in S.E.T. in two weeks' time?

I cannot confirm conclusions which the hon. Gentleman draws from figures which he has not yet seen.

I am satisfied that the interests of the trade unions and of consumers generally are adequately represented by the present membership of the Cost of Living Advisory Committee.

Does the omission of housewives from my hon. Friend's Answer mean that they are not adequately represented, in his view?

It does not mean that. It means, as I tried to explain in an earlier answer, that the index is intended to do a technical job, which it does with great accuracy. It also reflects the situation that it is difficult to get what my hon. Friend calls the typical housewife to serve on such bodies. The moment they are available for selection and service they almost invariably cease to be typical.

asked the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity what arrangements have been made for the Director General of the International Labour Office to visit the United Kingdom in connection with the 50th anniversary of that organisation; if she will provide facilities for him to meet members of both Houses of Parliament; and if she will make a statement.

At the First Secretary's invitation, Mr. David Morse, the Director General of the International Labour Office, will next month be paying a short official visit to this country to mark the 50th Anniversary of the International Labour Organisation. Mr. Morse will then be meeting representatives of employers' organisations, the trade union movement and members of the Government and Opposition. I will bear the hon. Member's suggestion in mind, but in the limited time available it will be difficult to add to the arrangements already planned.

Is my hon. Friend fully seized of the pride that we on these benches have at the part that Britain and the British trade unions have played in helping this remaining section of the League of Nations to continue its work for 50 years and in the magnificent job that it has done for workers all over the world?

Will my hon. Friend ensure that during Mr. David E. Morse's visit we are able to give expression to the pride that we have in the part that we have played in his organisation?

The Government share that view. The object of the First Secretary's invitation was to make it apparent.

asked the Secretary of State for Education and Science if the Government will make a contribution towards Welsh cultural life to commemorate the Investiture by providing funds for the setting up of a Welsh national theatre.

No request for Government assistance has yet been received. The first essential is for Wales to produce a firm scheme which has the support of Welsh people and the local authorities. This is now being drawn up by the Court of the National Theatre for Wales in close consultation with the Welsh Arts Council.

Do not the Government think that they should take the initiative in this matter? As we are having the Investiture this year, would it not be right to mark the occasion with a permanent contribution towards Welsh cultural life rather than leaving Wales with the ephemeral benefits from the Investiture itself?

I find that very strange. I should think that Wales would want to initiate this rather than leave it to the Government. But I will pass on to my right hon. Friend the Minister of State responsible for these matters what the hon. and learned Gentleman has said.

asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department in view of the fall in the value of money, and the higher wages and salaries that are being earned, if he will introduce legislation to increase five-fold the maximum fines which can be imposed for all crimes in all courts.

No, Sir. There is ordinarily no limit to the amount of a fine that may be imposed by a higher court on conviction on indictment. The Criminal Justice Act, 1967, quadrupled the maximum fine which a magistrates' court may impose for an indictable offence tried summarily and, following an extensive review of penalties fixed by earlier Statutes, increased many maximum fines for summary offences.

I did not ask about the higher courts. I was asking about the lower courts where the vast majority of—[HON. MEMBERS: "Make yourself clear."]—where the vast majority of petty crimes are tried and where magistrates impose penalties by fines. Since these fines were fixed many years ago, will the hon. Gentleman look at them again?

The hon. Gentleman may have failed to understand my reply. That is covered by Section 43 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1967.