asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if, in his forthcoming legislation, he will propose re-establishing a consumer protection council.

I have no such proposal in prospect.

With respect the right hon. Gentleman ought to have. Is he aware that despite the cuts in sugar and milk prices these commodities are still higher in price than they were in 1970, the infamous promise notwithstanding? Is he further aware that there has been a considerable rise in the prices of a vast range of household goods and commodities? Does he not think that people are entitled to value and that no trader with confidence in his goods would object to the establishment of a consumer council?

I never thought that the consumer council had done anything to bring prices down. As for the party opposite, it never did anything at all.

Will the right hon. Gentleman reconsider that reply? He has an opportunity in the Agriculture (Miscellaneous Provisions) Bill to bring in such a council and we will support it. Is he aware that if he brings in such a council to deal with prices, he will discover that the cut in sugar prices for example has led in some cases to sweet prices being increased by 200 per cent. to 300 per cent?

I had thought that hon. Gentlemen opposite would welcome a reduction in the price of food but they do not seem to do so.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what recent representations he has received from horticulturists with regard to Great Britain's joining the European Economic Community.

I have received a general policy statement from the National Famers' Union. My officials continue to maintain close contact with horticultural interests on a wide range of matters relating to entry into the E.E.C.

While thanking my right hon. Friend for that answer may I ask him to note that despite some initial misgivings about the E.E.C, the majority of environmental horticulturists in my constituency now believe that they have excellent opportunities for increasing their sales in the Community?

I am delighted to have that assurance. There has been a change in the mood of the horticulture industry in the last few months. There are still some problems ahead of us but these can be looked after as we go on, particularly by means of compensation for apple and pear growers.

Can my right hon. Friend say what progress has been made in his examination of possible methods of compensating horticulturists, particularly growers of tomatoes and cucumbers, to whom he referred in answer to Questions by me in the House some months ago?

The National Farmers' Union has now made definite proposals on apples and pears. At the moment we do not see any need to compensate efficient growers of tomatoes and cucumbers but we may have to take action as time goes on to encourage them to switch their production into other commodities. For the moment we feel that they have a good living in front of them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that flower growers are a little worried about the lack of information on value-added tax and how it will affect the industry? Can he give us some information?

The hon. Gentleman had better wait until a little later this afternoon.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by what European Economic Community body the level of United Kingdom farm commodity prices for the fat stock guarantees year 1973–74 will have to be approved.

United Kingdom Ministers will continue to be responsible for the price determinations subject to the terms of Article 54 of the Act annexed to the Treaty of Accession.

Will the right hon. Gentleman assure us that the pace of adaptation to the prices of the Community over the next 25 years will be our pace and that there will be noveto by any Community body, particularly with regard to the removal of commodities under the 1957 Act?

Under Article 54 increases in guaranteed prices may take place, but subject to a limit each year of one-sixth of the difference between the guaranteed price and the E.E.C. common price, plus a percentage increase equal to the per- cent age increase made in the E.E.C. common price for that year. We could reach a stage where our prices go above the guaranteed price, and at that stage the guarantee under the 1957 Act could be phased out.

Will the Minister confirm the report in today's Press that his Department and the Government have made representations to the Community on the effect of high cereal prices on feed costs?

This is part of the consultation which has been taking place over a period of time in which we are telling the Community our views on its prices in the same way that it is able to consult us on what we have been doing.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food through what institutions, in the context of the European Economic Community's horticultural marketing regulations, member countries of the European Economic Community make available to producer organisations low credit loans to cover part of the costs of operating market withdrawals.

No such loans have been made in Belgium, France and the Netherlands. Some have been made in Germany and Italy through the Ministries of Agriculture.

I thank my hon. Friend for that reply. Will he please ensure that this matter is looked into and that the horticulture and market gardening industry can be made fully aware of the implications of our joining the Common Market with respect to these loans?

Yes, Sir, I shall certainly see to it. I would add that the Community is not using very much the method that my hon. Friend has mentioned.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he has taken to ensure that horticulturists and, in particular, merchants of horticultural produce understand the rôle of producer groups in the European Economic Community and the benefits which depend on forming them when the United Kingdom becomes a full member of the Community.

Discussions have been held with representatives of producers and trade interests. As my hon. Friend will now have seen from the 1972 Annual Review White Paper, further consultations are being arranged.

Will my right hon. Friend consider taking immediate and practical steps to improve the industry's understanding of the vital need for greater co-operation in the light of these new developments?

We cannot hear a word.

As soon as we know exactly what the Community is proposing, we shall give it all the publicity that we can. Meanwhile, I shall seek an early opportunity to try to put to horticulturists the points that my hon. Friend suggests.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what steps he is taking to prevent imports of pigs and of pigmeat entering the United Kingdom from countries of the European Economic Community which exercise no control of swine fever on their farms.

The Accession Treaty authorises the continuance of our present import rules for live pigs. For pigmeat we shall continue to take the necessary protective measures which we are confident can be justified under the provisions of the relevant directive.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is general concern that Article 104 of the Treaty of Accession is inadequate protection for the pig industry and that, after 1977, no protection is afforded against animals infected with swine fever being imported into this country?

The five-year derogation which we got on foot-and-mouth disease protects us from swine fever as well.

Is my hon. Friend aware that health regulations appear to be being used increasingly within the Common Market as a form of protection and that this applies not only to live- stock but to horticultural produce? Are the Government aware of this and are they protesting as hard as they should?

I think that my hon. Friend has a later Question on that subject.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what progress has been made towards a computerised system of recording market prices for horticultural produce in order to ensure immediate and accurate information within the enlarged Community.

My Department provides weekly market reports of wholesale prices for a wide range of horticultural produce sold in the nine principal markets in England and Wales. There are no plans at present for putting this work on to computers.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there is criticism of the system of recording market prices in this country particularly compared with the practice in France? Unless the machinery in this country is improved, it will be extremely difficult for the Minister to keep his assurance to growers that immediate action will be taken to act promptly to avoid disruption in the Community.

It is true that in the Community regulations demand daily prices for items subject to intervention during the marketing season. The present arrangements will be all right for our own purposes. I am always ready to consider an improvement. We are looking at the future requirements for giving price data and market intelligence to the Community.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the French sample over 20 markets daily whereas we sample only nine? Surely this should be done by computer and should be put on a computer before we join the E.E.C.

Certainly the markets in the United Kingdom, on which this work will be done, are still to be agreed. I should point out that an experiment was made with a computer at Covent Garden. It was perfectly feasible and practical, but totally non-viable as few traders would use it. We hope to make progress in this sphere.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what changes in the expenditure and consumption per head of retirement pensioners on meat, butter and milk took place between the fourth quarter of 1970 and 1971, respectively, or the latest date for which such figures are available.

As the answer includes a number of figures, I will, with permission, circulate them in the Official Report.

In so far as the figures are likely to be those of the National Food Survey which are published by the right hon. Gentleman's Department, will the Minister accept in general terms that, despite the increase in pensions, the position that will be revealed is that butter consumption has gone down by one-quarter while expenditure on fat has increased by 25 per cent.; that while meat consumption has gone up slightly expenditure on meat has gone up sharply, and that milk consumption has gone down by 2 per cent. and the cost has gone up by 15 per cent.?

No, Sir, I certainly would not confirm the last of the hon. Gentleman's assertions. He is, broadly speaking, right about butter and carcase meat. It is interesting to note that there has been an increase in consumption of carcase meat as well as an increase in expenditure on it. For butter the trends are similar to those for the population as a whole.

My right hon. Friend will be aware that the 12-monthly review will help considerably. Will he continue to press upon the Government the necessity to resist exorbitant wage claims which put increasing pressures on pensioners?

There is no doubt that exorbitant wage claims are the largest single factor in price increases and, therefore, we all need to take whatever action we can to keep them down.

Is the Minister aware that old-age pensioners spend a large proportion of their income on food and that increases in food prices weigh heavily upon them? Is he also aware that under the present Administration "old age" is another term for "poverty", and that something must be done?

Of course that remark is the nonsense that the right hon. Gentleman knows it to be. What is more, the Conservative Party is the party that has agreed to an annual increase in pensions, which is more than the Opposition did.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food by what percentage the cost of food has risen since 18th June, 1970, and what has been the average monthly increase over the past six months.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what has been the increase in food prices since 18th June, 1970.

The latest available information about the increase in the Food Index since June, 1970, was given in my reply to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Northfield (Mr. Carter) on 29th February. The average monthly increase between July, 1971, and January, 1972, was rather less than 0·6 per cent.—[Vol. 832, c. 58–59.]

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is a scandalous rate of increase—[Laughter.] But in connection with the recently announced cut in the price of milk what discussions did he have with his right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and Science before the cut was announced? Does he not realise that the country as a whole would welcome this more as an opportunity to restore free milk in school?

My right hon. Friend was informed and, as one would expect, I have had discussions with my colleagues. I can tell the hon. Gentleman that my colleagues welcomed the cuts very much indeed, and I am sorry that the Opposition do not.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that not only have prices been relatively stable recently but also that the recent measures he has taken will have a marked effect in reducing the prices of certain food commodities?

Yes, Sir, that is true—and it is the Conservative Government which have cut these prices, S.E.T. and also purchase tax. I cannot remember a single case in which the Labour Government ever cut anything.

Will the Minister give an assurance that the Conservative Administration will not support the introduction of a value-added tax which will affect food prices?

We have already made it abundantly clear that food, other than those items of food on which the Labour Party put purchase tax, will be relieved of V.A.T. Perhaps the right hon. Gentleman should wait until a little later in the afternoon.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what is the size of the dairy herd at the latest convenient date; and what increase he expects in heifers retained in the herd during 1972–73.

At the December, 1971, Census—based partly on sample returns—there were 3,346,000 dairy cows in the United Kingdom. This is the first sign of expansion in the dairy herd. In line with that expansion I expect to see some increase in the number of dairy heifers entering the dairy herd in 1972–73.

I congratulate my hon. Friend on the first upturn in the level of the dairy herd for many years. What estimate has he made of the amount of milk which will go into the manufacturing industry and what increase in take-up of the butter market of the United Kingdom will come from herds in this country?

My hon. Friend will get some idea of this from the fact that this year our butter market will be supplied to the extent of about 16 per cent. from home supplies compared with less than 10 per cent. some years ago. I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his first remark. The increase in the size of the dairy herd shows what the resolute policy of my right hon. Friend can do compared with the vacillation plus a mixture of caution and adventure which the righthon. Member for Working ton (Mr. Peart) used to display.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he now expects to publish his review of forestry.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will now publish the report of the review recently undertaken in his Department of the future of forestry policy.

My right hon. Friend will be making a statement between the Easter and Whitsun Recesses.

I thank the Minister for that reply. He will remember that on 16th November he promised to publish the review as soon as practicable. Does he realise that in the intervening period there has been considerable disquiet in the uplands areas about our entry into Europe and its effect upon farming and forestry? Will he confirm that the review will be published?

I regret the delay since my original statement. This is an extremely complex inquiry involving many considerations. I accept to a limited degree what the hon. Gentleman has said about anxiety in the uplands areas, although I believe the balance is now being restored between what I regard as so important, and that is farming and forestry combined. There will be a publication.

Is the Minister aware of the widespread public interest in this subject of those who use the countryside for recreation? Will he confirm that the report will be published and that there will be a debate on the subject in the House?

The question of a debate is for a channel slightly above my level, but I will certainly draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to this question. I confirm that there will be a publication.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House the acreage of Forestry Commission planting this year and the percentage of home-grown soft timber which is used in this country?

Not, I am afraid, without notice.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will seek powers to equalise the charges for milk to 7 to 11-year-old school-children and the charges of milk of the same quality delivered by rounds men.

No, Sir, I would not wish to discourage education authorities from providing milk to schoolchildren by enforcing a maximum price which might prevent them from recovering their reasonable expenses.

Does the Minister accept that position even though it will mean that, when administrative and delivery costs are added to the retail price of milk, schoolchildren will be paying more than their mothers are paying for milk on the doorstep—and in some education areas much more by the summer—and although this growing divergence arises out of the Government's decision to deprive 7 to 11-year-old schoolchildren of free milk?

As I said to the hon. Gentleman on the last occasion when he asked this question, it is perfectly possible for education authorities to buy milk at below the maximum price. It comes ill from the hon. Gentleman to criticise this scheme when his Government withdrew free milk from secondary school pupils and neither made provision for health needs nor allowed local authorities to provide milk and charge for it.

Will my hon. Friend point out to education authorities that under the powers of the Local Authorities (Goods and Services) Act they can purchase centrally and that there need be no worry about milk costing more than the retail price?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend and I will look into his suggestion.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what price-watching machinery he plans to institute in order to act swiftly to deal with market disruption of horticultural produce.

This matter will be kept under review, but I am not at present persuaded of the need for additional machinery for official monitoring of prices in the horticultural sector since these prices can already be obtained at short notice whenever necessary.

Will my right hon. Friend explain the difference between commercial prices and prices in the horticultural industry at present given by the Ministry?

I am not certain that I understand the point my hon. Friend is making. We have a number of methods of assessing prices. At the end of each month we issue statistical information and each fortnight there is a bulletin describing retail market prices. The tables issued at the end of each week are probably the most reliable and they are based on the commercial price and not the retail price.

Surely the right hon. Gentleman should easily get the point which his hon. Friend is making. He is saying that there is no control over horticultural prices, as there is no control over other prices.

No, I am not

What the hon. Gentleman is trying to say to his right hon. Friend is that not only he but the people of the country are getting sick of this.

The hon. Gentleman of course never gets any point correctly. Even if he gets a point correctly, his Government certainly did not when they were in office.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that my hon. Friend the Member for Louth (Mr. Jeffrey Archer) is on an entirely different point from that suggested by the hon. Member for Renfrew, West (Mr. Buchan)? My hon. Friend is saying that horticultural prices are deplorably low and that British horticulturists need a good bit of support.

British horticulturists do a jolly good job in supplying us with large quantities of fresh food at reasonable prices. I confirm what my hon. Friend has said.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what rôle he is planning for his Department in general, and the Forestry Commission in particular, in relation to the Plant a Tree Year in 1973.

My Department and the Forestry Commission will be in very close touch with the Department of the Environment about the part they can appropriately play in the success of the Tree Planting Year, but it is too soon to say exactly what form this might take.

I thank my hon. Friend for that encouraging reply. In agreeing to this close co-operation, will either my hon. Friend or his right hon. Friend consider taking a place on the committee set up by the Secretary of State to advise on encouraging this excellent venture?

Since I am always rather reluctant to sit on Committees, I am hesitant to express any glowing enthusiasm for the suggestion but I will bear my hon. Friend's point in mind.

If the hon. Gentleman cannot say the exact form this will take, can he say what general form it will take?

It will be part of our job to see that the campaign catches on in the countryside; this is a major part of it. In that case we shall try to see that the support of the N.F.U. is enlisted.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what estimates he has made of the cost of wages as a percentage of total farming costs today compared with 10 years ago.

Labour costs were 22 per cent. of total farming costs in 1961–62 and are forecast to be 19 per cent. in 1971–72.

In view of the magnificent productivity record, why are our farm workers' wages so shockingly low? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this morning I received from him a letter saying that in the last Price Review he had given farmers 50 per cent. more than was necessary to recoup their increased costs? Will he tell farmers to give some of this money to the farm workers to lift their £16 minimum wage, which is a disgrace?

If hon. Gentlemen on the Opposition side had done more to help the farming industry when they were in office, farm workers might now be better of. Farm workers' wages are determined by the Agricultural Wages Board, which consists of equal numbers of workers and farmers with a number of independent members. It is far better left to the members of the board than for hon. Members in this House to interfere.

Would not my hon. Friend agree that only this year farm workers received an increase in pay and, although they probably deserve more, must it not be borne in mind that over 90 per cent. of them have average earnings of more than £20 a week?

The average earnings in 1971–72 were nearly £22 a week and there are also considerable benefits in kind which are not taken into account.

Is the Minister aware that many of the recent replies about farm workers' wages have been disquieting? Will he not agree that there should now be a substantial increase in agricultural wages if farm workers are to break out of the poverty trap created for low-paid workers by the present Government?

The hon. Gentleman, as usual, does his case no good by exaggeration. He must realise that, unless prices are to be increased, we cannot pay increased wages without extra production. Hon. Members opposite are always going on about prices increasing. However, they do not say what should be done about the other side of the problem.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food (1) if, after considering the application from Imperial Chemical Industries to dump 90,000 gallons of arsenic waste into the Bristol Channel, he will request the firm first to remove the small proportion of arsenic trioxide before the waste is dumped under the voluntary arrangements made by him;

(2) when he expects to make a decision about the application from Imperial Chemical Industries to dump 90,000 gallons of arsenic waste into the Bristol Channel.

My Department has agreed, subject to certain conditions of disposal, to the dumping over a period of 12 months of this solution which contains a very small proportion of arsenic trioxide. I am advised that this operation will not be harmful to consumers or fisheries. Removal of the arsenic trioxide before disposal would not be warranted.

Will the hon. Gentleman appreciate that many experts do not accept his point of view? Does he not agree, therefore, that he should take a firmer line and that, although the removal of arsenic trioxide may be more costly, people's health and well-being are far more important than the narrow pursuit of profit?

The waste contains no more than between 1 and 4 per cent. of arsenic trioxide. The conditions for dumping are that the solution must be mixed with sewage sludge, the vessel carrying such material must move at a specified rate and workers must wear protective clothing. These are considerable safeguards.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that this is a serious problem for such beautiful holiday resorts as Clovelly and Westward Ho? Will he ask those concerned to move their slops elsewhere?

As I have said, this has been done after agreement with the fisheries departments, and it is an area in which monitoring is being done.

Will the hon. Gentleman say why it is necessary for any firm to dump any arsenic waste, of whatever solution and quantity, in the Bristol Channel? By whom was the hon. Gentleman advised that this would not be harmful? How much is the firm paying for the benefit of getting rid of its waste in this way?

I cannot answer the hon. Gentleman's last question. I am advised that this is all strictly within the terms of the Oslo Convention, which my right hon. Friend signed recently, by which arsenic requires special care where it is present in significant quantities. In fact, it is not in this case.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food when he hopes to bring forward legislation on the dumping of toxic wastes in the North Sea.

I would refer the hon. Member to my right hon. Friend's reply to his Question on 8th March when he said that the United Kingdom will take power to control dumping at sea as soon as possible.—[Vol. 832, c. 359.]

Has there been any Government thinking on the question of penalties since 8th March?

Not as far as I am aware.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what examination has been made within his Department since June, 1970, of ways in which British food distribution costs could be cut so as to exert a downward effect on final retail food prices.

This is primarily a matter for the distributive industry, which is generally accepted to operate at a high level of efficiency. Costs have been reduced by the Government action on selective employment tax and other taxes.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that answer, and I immediately pay tribute to the general efficiency of the food distribution sector, especially in comparison with many other European countries. But will my right hon. Friend undertake to look at this again since there is evidence that excessive transport costs, seasonal effects and the construction of the distribution sector mean that in many cases food prices to the housewife will be more than they need be?

One is looking constantly at this type of question. Certainly I will look at it again. We know that factors like transport and other ancillary trades have contributed considerably to the increase in costs over recent years.

Does the Minister accept that the retail distribution by large hypermarkets outside towns creates problems other than those of the cost of the commodity to the consumer? In considering developments of this kind, will the right hon. Gentleman ensure that his Department co-ordinates with the Department of the Environment to ensure that the social consequences are not bad for the community?

Certainly, and I am in close touch with my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment about this. Recently the Government have published guidance to local authorities and others on the subject of hypermarkets. We have to balance the social considerations with the undoubted economic advantages.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what representations he has had from the Sussex Cattle Breeders Society about exporting cattle to France; and what reply he has sent.

My right hon. Friend has received letters on this subject both from the society and from my hon. Friend himself, complaining about the restrictions placed by France on the establishment of new breeds.

These restrictions are part of the general French policy on cattle breeding and in no way discriminate against the United Kingdom. However, I am consulting our Embassy in Paris as to whether it can help. I shall be replying similarly to the society.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the French were very happy to receive these cattle and then changed their minds? In view of my right hon. Friend's liberalisation policy of receiving European cattle into this country, is it not about time that the French behaved like good Europeans?

Our policy of liberalisation benefits our own livestock industry most. I hope very much that the efforts at the Paris salon, which have been splendid on the whole, will help to let the French see the advantages of our breeds.

Does the Minister think that our Ambassador in France, who when Minister of Agriculture kept out French cattle from this country for 10 years, will have a lot of influence now in France?

I think so. I realise with what interest the hon. Gentleman speaks.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that a great many Sussex breeders are keenly interested in the action that he is taking in this matter?

I am certain that if the Sussex breed will put on as good a show as the Galloway breed, it will do very well.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take immediate steps to ban the use of the Iron Maiden, in which sows are confined and in which they are unable to walk, turn around, scratch or groom themselves.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will take steps to forbid the use of the Iron Maiden, a tubular steel device which keeps a nursing sow fettered to the ground from four to seven weeks.

No, Sir. The term "Iron Maiden" has been used by the Press to describe the Protect a system for sows. This is an acceptable form of tethering under proper management.

Does my hon. Friend realise that the manufacturers of this contraption have stated that it can be inhumane unless it is administered by very efficient stockmen and is under constant supervision? No one, not even my hon. Friend, can believe that the supervision is such that it takes place at all times, including during the night. In view of the adequacy of sow stalls, why cannot this contraption be banned?

I understand the anxiety of my hon. Friend and of very many others. However, I must point out that the Protect a system allows more freedom of movement than used to take place in the traditional far rowing crate which was in existence 30 years ago and that tethering outside has been going on for generations. It is a system which depends on good management, and there are factors on the other side which one must consider in trying to come to a balanced judgment.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that good management is not always present? In view of that, is the hon. Gentleman further aware that representations are being made to the effect that this is a very cruel practice and that there will be bitter disappointment that he refuses to do anything about it?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that we keep a very close eye on this system. I have received detailed reports on it from our veterinary officers, none of which has been adverse.

Going back to the wording of the Question, may I ask how a sow can groom itself?

It is by no means mandatory that it should be able to do so.

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that there is a widespread feeling of revulsion and abhorrence about this practice and that many people believe that the only way to compel the bringing about of a decent alternative is for the hon. Gentleman to have the courage to outlaw this barbarous practice?

I know the hon. Gentleman's view on this. He led a delegation to see me and we had a long talk about it. But I am afraid that, despite the photograph which has been widely circulated and which I think, with respect, tended to make things a good deal worse than they need have been, I cannot accept what he says.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if, in view of recent representations he will expedite the report of the Food Standards Committee on date coding.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food if he will seek to expedite the report of the Food Standards Committee on the date-marking of perishable foods.

The committee is proceeding with all reasonable speed to analyse the mass of evidence received from some 200 interested parties and to formulate recommendations on a subject which is both complex, controversial and of great importance and where experience in other countries must be taken into account.

Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the conclusions which must be drawn is that the sooner a simple and clearly marked date on certain food is stamped by the manufacturers to protect housewives, the better will housewives get a fair deal?

This is precisely the matter at which the committee is being asked to look.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it is an insult to the housewife to put coded date stamping on food when she can buy French yoghourt in any shop in England with the date clearly marked on it not in code?

This is a point which undoubtedly is being looked at by the committee, which is going through a great deal of evidence.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what forms or organisation he has contemplated setting up in his consideration of the Rothschild Report, to represent the needs of the agricultural industry to serve as the customers proposed in the report.

These among other points are still subject to discussion; but I accept the need to set up a Chief Scientists' Organisation within my Department, and also to ensure that the views of the agricultural and food industries are fully integrated into the process of formulating the needs of research and development.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that we already have a large technical advantage over the Community, that this needs to be maintained and that it means a lot of money being spent on research? Will he confirm that this is so and take advice on what the N.F.U. is saying on this subject?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food what proportion of the milk fund will be required to pay the increase to producers given at this year's review.

At this year's Annual Review we have given an increase of about £23 million which is just under 5 per cent. of the total value of the milk guarantee.

From calculations which I have made on figures which I have received from the Minister, it has cost the consumer at least £80 million more for butter and cheese during the 21 months that the Government have been in power. This is where the fund has come from. Will the right hon. Gentleman answer two questions: first, was he not misleading the House when he said that the consumer did not pay for the extra penny that the farmer was getting; and secondly, does he think that the balance of the fund will maintain the decrease in milk prices to the consumer after September?

I will answer the last part of the hon. Gentleman's question first. The milk fund will hardly be in balance by the end of March, 1973, as a result of the reduction in price over the next four months.

On the first part of the question, the answer is that only a proportion of the increase resulting from the manufactured milk market goes into the milk fund. It is only that portion which lies within the standard quantity. The portion lying outside the standard quantity goes direct to the farmer. That will amount to about £15 million during the coming year if the price of manufactured milk remains at about its present level.

asked the Prime Minister what discussions on international monetary matters he had in his recent talks with M. Pompidou.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his recent meeting with President Pompidou.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will make a statement on his talks with President Pompidou.

President Pompidou paid an informal visit to Chequers on 18th and 19th March. We discussed a wide range of subjects of interest to both our countries, including international monetary and trade questions, the future of the enlarged Community and East-West relations. The details of our discussion must remain confidential.

I put it to the Prime Minister that the reason that M. Pompidou is having a referendum is that he knows he will win, whereas the right hon. Gentleman is not having one because he knows he would lose. The reason in both cases is the same. Because of the appalling terms negotiated by his right hon. and learned Friend—

Order. Is this a question?

—every French taxpayer will be benefiting by sharing in a lifelong pension of hundreds of millions of pounds a year paid for by the British taxpayer and housewife.

The reason is that both countries and Governments are following their own constitutional procedures.

May the House take it that my right hon. Friend assured M. Pompidou that, whatever need there may be in France to show up the political divisions of their Opposition by holding a referendum on enlarging the E.E.C., we in this country require no such device to expose the divisions in the leaderless rabble on the Opposition benches?

My hon. Friend is correct, It is an internal matter for President Pompidou and the French Government. The Opposition here have made their divisions only too plain.

Is not the referendum, as the Leader of the Opposition once said—for all I know, he may still be saying it—contrary to the traditions of this country? In any case, will not the massive "Yes" that will be given on 23rd April to British entry make St. George's day as memorable in our history as St. Crispin's day?

The Leader of the Opposition on that occasion went on to say that

"It is not a way in which we can do business."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 25th November, 1969; Vol. 792, c. 200.]

I agree with him in that and hope that it is still his view.

Will the Prime Minister give a little serious attention to what is, after all, a very serious question? Does he now agree that, given the fact that Norway and others of the applicant countries and the French people are to have a serious opportunity to express their opinion on this important move, it is high time he agreed that the people of the United Kingdom should also have such an opportunity in a General Election?

As for a General Election, it was made perfectly plain at the last General Election by this party that we had a mandate to negotiate—[HON. MEMBERS: "No."]—and that if the negotiations were successful we would put them to Parliament. Parliament—[Interruption.] However much hon. Members may dislike it, Parliament approved them by a majority of 112. It is on that basis that we are working.

asked the Prime Minister if the public speech by the Secretary of State for Employment at Dover on 4th March on the pattern of unemployment represents the policy of Her Majesty's Government.

Yes, Sir. My right hon. Friend explained how the high level of wage inflation had led employers to cut costs and to reduce their labour force.

Given that the Secretary of State found no particular distortion in the underlying pattern, does not the Prime Minister think that there is a danger of school leavers and other young people, of whom there were nearly 5,000 in York- shire and Humberside last month alone, being overwhelmed? Will he not therefore initiate more grants to industry for training schemes and to education authorities for career teaching? Does he think that it is sufficient that only 12 out of Sheffield's 32 comprehensive schools should be equipped with a careers room?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment has recently announced a massive plan for the increase in training. Although of course it will take time for that gradually to come into effect, it will meet many of the points which the hon. Gentleman has raised.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that the difference between the policies expressed by the Secretary of State and those followed by the party opposite is that, whereas we are deliberately trying to reduce unemployment, they deliberately tried to increase it?

Yes, Sir.

asked the Prime Minister if he will make a statement about his future plans for talks jointly with representatives of the Trades Union Congress and the Confederation of British Industry.

I remain in close touch with the T.U.C. and the C.B.I., but the precise timing and form of future meetings have yet to be decided.

Can the right hon. Gentleman give an undertaking that, in subsequent meetings, he will meet the T.U.C. and the representatives of the C.B.I, together instead of separately? Will he further have a good look at the admirable article written in The Guardian yesterday by my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher), which showed clearly that the present Government's incomes policy, linked with means-tested benefits right through the Welfare State, is destroying any prospect of real co-operation between ordinary working people and the Government, and that the higher-paid miner, who was granted an increase by the Wilberforce recommendations of £4·50, finds that amount reduced to a magnificent sum net of 8p per week? Is this not an intolerable situation?

I cannot accept the last part of that supplementary question. On the first part, I noticed that the point of the hon. Gentleman's question was that the talks should be held jointly. I put this to the T.U.C. and to the C.B.I, when we had our first meetings and it was agreed that it is for consideration that there should be a joint meeting of both of them with the Government. But we also agreed that we would wait until our next discussions, after the Budget, before we settled when that meeting should come about.

Has my right hon. Friend seen the recent report of the Institute of Fiscal Research, which shows that the poorest section of the community, thanks to the actions of the present Government, is 28 per cent. better off than before the last General Election? Will he draw the attention of the T.U.C. to that report?

In fairness to the T.U.C. I must say that when it has met me, it has not taken the view expressed by the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton).

asked the Prime Minister when he expects a definite date to be announced for the proposed meeting of Heads of Government of members and applicant members of the European Economic Community.

I cannot say when a definite date will be announced, but it is generally agreed that this meeting will be held in the second half of October.

If M. Pompidou allows him to, will the Prime Minister raise at that meeting the question of the difficult situation which might arise over some of the contracts and arrangements now existing between E.F.T.A. countries which might become E.E.C. countries? Will he try to iron out all the difficulties which will arise when they will not be able to honour some of the treaties which they have signed? Britain could be put in such a situation.

We all hope that the negotiations with the E.F.T.A. countries will have been completed by the time the summit is held. As the hon. Gentleman knows, negotiations are going on at the moment in which we have endeavoured to be as helpful as we can, although we are not actually a party to the negotiations.

Is it not obvious to everyone except the carpers on the Opposition benches that, on the foundation of today's excellent Anglo-French and Anglo-German relations, this can be a great decade for Europe and that much of the credit for this prospect is due to the steadfast European policies of the present Government?

I agree with my hon. Friend. I am glad that he has emphasised that Anglo-German relations are equally good. We look forward to the visit of the Chancellor of West Germany in a month's time.

Between now and October, is the Prime Minister going anywhere in particular?

I shall be going on an official visit to Denmark in June, but that is the limit of my overseas travelling plans at the moment.

asked the Prime Minister what arrangements he has made or proposes to make for the provision of refreshments for visitors to No. 10 Downing Street.

Whatever is appropriate.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this Question is partly inspired by reports that he had to send out for beer and sandwiches when he met the miners' leaders, in spite of the experiences set forth by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition? The Prime Minister seemed totally unprepared on this occasion, as he was for the miners' strike itself. It is also partly inspired by the fact that when the hon. Member for South all has walked all the way from Clerkenwell Green and other places protesting about the right hon. Gentleman's immigration Bill, and against the rise of racialism and Fascism, he has not even been able to get a cup of tea at No. 10 Downing Street. Will not the right hon. Gentleman agree that he did very well out of the last Budget, that he will probably do well out of today's Budget and that he can afford much better?

Members of the miners' executive who came to No. 10 asked for tea, sandwiches, beer and whisky, and they were supplied with tea, sandwiches, beer and whisky.

Can my right hon. Friend say whether Wincarnis is still being served?

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech made at Weston-super-Mare on 4th March, 1972, on the subject of the economy.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech to the Conservative Local Government Conference on Saturday, 4th March, on the subject of the economy.

asked the Prime Minister if he will place in the Library a copy of his public speech on 4th March at Weston-super-Mare on economic matters.

I did so on 7th March, Sir.

In that speech the right hon. Gentleman referred to the Government's desire to reduce unemployment to an acceptable level. Could he now tell the House what he and his Government believe an acceptable level to be? If, as a result of the measures to be announced later today, unemployment stands at 750,000 in the autumn, would he regard that as above or below an acceptable level?

I am not prepared to make forecasts on this matter.

When the right hon. Gentleman talked of an acceptable level, did he have any figure at all in mind?

I repeat what I have just said: I will not make public forecasts.

In his speech the Prime Minister made no attempt to explain the Government's incomprehensible policy on subsidies. Will he now reply to a question which he has previously failed to answer and say why it is right to spend £25 million subsidising sugar and wrong to spend £9 million on school milk?

My right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture has dealt with the question of the stabilisation of food prices—because this is a matter which affects the whole of the population and enables us to pursue the policy of preventing the cost of living from rising faster. I should have thought that this was a policy which had the support of right hon. and hon Gentlemen opposite. It is certainly one with which we intend to go on.

In his speech my right hon. Friend referred to regional problems. Can he say whether the massive battery of regional expedients deployed by the Leader of the Opposition, including his speeches, when he was in office, made any material change in the regional imbalance?

Yes.

I am afraid that hon. Gentlemen opposite are wrong. If my hon Friend refers to the case of Scotland, for example, he will find that unemployment there has been on an upward-rising curve ever since 1964. I should have thought that both sides of the House could have recognised that the problems of the regions are very deep-seated indeed and that, over the past 25 years, neither party when in Government has yet succeeded in dealing with these fundamental problems of balance between the regions. Therefore, we are now determined to approach this with a fresh look.

Before I call the Chancellor of the Exchequer, it may be for the convenience of right hon. and hon. Members if I remind them that at the end of the Chancellor's speech, as in the last four years, copies of the Budget Resolutions will not be handed round in the Chamber but will be available at the Vote Office.

The Budget which I introduced last year was the first of the new Parliament, and in it I outlined a programme of taxation reform which I shall be developing further today, but this Budget also is a first—from a different point of view. It is the first Budget since Parliament took the historic decision that we should join the European Economic Communities.

In January we shall become part of a new market of 300 million people. This enlarged outlet for our goods and services together with the present scope for expansion provide our country with an unparalleled opportunity over the coming years. The various proposals which I shall put to the House today are designed to help British industry to modernise, to re-equip and to reorganise to meet the challenge of greater international competition. And they are designed to ensure that we take full advantage of this unique set of circumstances to build a more prosperous Britain.

But if, because of the opportunity which is opening up, we are right to set our sights high and to look with confidence beyond the immediate future, we are right also to regard with profound concern the immediate problem of a level of unemployment which has persisted despite the unprecedented action to counter it which has been taken over the past year.

So these are my aims in presenting this Budget.

First, that, as we set out on our European venture, British industry should have every encouragement to be efficient and forward-looking.

Second, that the British economy should grow at a sustained and faster rate, and so bring a permanent improvement in both employment and living standards.

Third, that we should make further progress with taxation reform, so as to evolve a system which is more just, and a system which over the years and decades ahead will help to create a greater national wealth.

No taxation policy can of itself guarantee prosperity, but, as we have learned to our cost in recent years, it can most certainly hinder it. This is why taxation reform is an essential element of our strategy for increasing our rate of economic growth, and it is economic growth that we need to bring down the deplorably high level of unemployment and to increase the real wealth of our country.

There are some who have recently been doubting the whole idea of economic growth, because they fear that what is at present regarded as progress may, in fact, be causing, or be about to cause, irreparable damage to our environment. They are rightly concerned about the quality of life in this country and across the world.

I believe that most hon. Members, while recognising this concern, will still take the view that the main threat to the quality of life in this country has come from the inadequacy of real incomes, from social problems such as unemployment, and from those consequences of slow growth such as the persistence of bad schools, of old hospitals, of slums and urban squalor. The fact is that both the cause and the solution of all these problems lies in our economic performance.

I must warn the House that my statement today will be long. The House will recall that last year I announced plans for the radical reform of company taxation, of indirect taxation and of personal taxation. All these three reforms will become operative a year hence, in April, 1973. Because of the needs of business planning, including computer programming, it is now more than ever desirable that people should know as far ahead as possible what are our present intentions about future tax measures. I shall, therefore, not only set out the structure and main details of the changes, but I have decided that it is right to take the unusual step of giving today my present ideas about the new rates for next year, even though the House and the country will recognise that these may have to be changed if circumstances alter. In doing this, I am following the principle of more "open government" in matters of taxation wherever I can, as, indeed, I did last year.

Also, I shall put forward further proposals for the reform of our taxation system, and, in particular, for the longer term, a scheme, which I shall in due course ask the House to consider, for a fundamental simplification and bringing together of our systems of Pay-as-you-earn and social security.