asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if it is the practice of the Treasury to pay British and foreign nationals for information received concerned with evasion of tax and exchange control regulations; in how many cases in the last five years such payments have been made; what was the average payment; which countries were involved; whether British income tax was paid on such payments in the case of British residents; and if he will make a statement.

Such payments are occasionally made by the Departments concerned. In relation to income tax and exchange control together there have been approximately 15 cases during the last five years, averaging a little over £100 each. In about four cases, the recipients were believed to be resident in other Commonwealth or foreign countries. The payments are not liable to British income tax.

:Would it be possible to have a successful prosecution in such cases, in view of the way in which the information has been obtained? Has the Chancellor considered making representations to the Swiss Government through one of the international bodies on behalf of Britain and other countries to seek to persuade the Swiss Government to cease giving assistance to criminals from this country and elsewhere?

Any matters concerning approaches to the Swiss Government are for my right hon. Friend the Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary. The matter to which the hon. Gentleman is referring is now sub judice.

Apart from approaches to the Swiss Government, will the right hon. Gentleman congratulate the Treasury on this excellent piece of public enterprise? Is he aware that many hon. Members on this side of the House hope that the Treasury will continue this practice and stoop to conquer if necessary.

:For the reason which I have given, I do not want to say anything about the case in question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what have been the percentage increases in the Retail Price Index compared with six months earlier, for April, 1970, May, 1970, and June, 1970, and for December, 1971, January, 1972, and February, 1972.

The percentage increases in the General Index of Retail Prices, compared with six months earlier were for April, May and June, 1970, 4·4 per cent., 4·5 per cent. and 4·1 per cent. respectively. The corresponding figures for December, 1971, and for January and February, 1972, were 2·5 per cent., 2·4 per cent., and 2·9 per cent. respectively.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that although the present rate of inflation is still much too high it is significantly lower than the rate of inflation which the Government inherited from the previous Labour Government?

:My hon. Friend is quite right. Certainly we have a long way to go, but I think the whole House, in fairness, will agree that we have made considerable progress.

:Will the right hon. Gentleman state the increase in price levels between April, 1970, and February, 1972?

If the right hon. Gentleman would like to put down a Question referring to specific months I should be happy to answer it. I am sure that he will be the first to agree that over the past six or nine months the Government have made considerable progress and have had considerable success in bringing down the increase in prices.

Will the Chancellor confirm that the figures seem to indicate that prices have now levelled out and are rising again?

I do not think that necessarily follows, but I have no intention of forecasting the future. If the hon. Gentleman is speaking of the figure for the February increase to which I referred, that was affected by the fact that the comparison is between this February and August of last year, and the August figure included the effects of the purchase tax cuts which I made in July and the C.B.I. initiative.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will consider reducing the 45 per cent. purchase tax on deerskins tanned with the hair on to 11¼ per cent. which is the rate for comparable sheepskins, as a measure to promote rural industry in Scotland; and if he will state the total revenue from this source for the last available year.

The 45 per cent. rate has now been reduced to 25 per cent. which should be of some help to this rural industry. Separate totals for revenue from this source are not available.

:Would the right hon. Gentleman accept an estimate of probably about £4,000 as being the total revenue from this source? Is he aware that the two companies which have been operating in this field went into liquidation last year, that the business is becoming unprofitable, and that there is no logic in having a reduction of 25 per cent. Since this is still higher than the comparable rate for sheepskins?

Yes, I accept that this is an anomaly. One of the reasons for introducing V.A.T. at one rate was to get rid of this sort of anomaly.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what further consultations he intends to have about his proposals for the introduction of a value-added tax.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what consultations have taken place and are proposed in connection with the introduction of value-added tax; and if he will make a statement.

Customs and Excise will continue to have consultations with representative trade bodies about the detailed operation of the tax, and to give advice and guidance on any problems connected with it.

:Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that although in some respects the Government's proposals for V.A.T. are not as bad as many of us feared, there is one matter on which hon. Members on both sides of the House feel that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made a mistake? Will he assure the House that he is prepared to reconsider the question of not giving a zero rating to the live theatre?

This question was put to my hon. Friend the Minister of State in the Budget debate and he dealt with it then. He said quite rightly that there will be an opportunity to raise a variety of such matters in Committee on the Finance Bill.

Would my right hon. Friend consider circulating that part of his hon. Friend's statement in the Budget debate in view of the opinion of many hon. Members that value-added tax will succeed only if it has as few exceptions as possible, and does he not appreciate that it is the wish of this House that there shall be as few exceptions as possible?

:My hon. Friend is absolutely right, and I note that he was supported by some typical grunts from my hon. Friend the Member for Worcestershire, South (Sir G. Nabarro). There is no doubt at all that one of the great faults of purchase tax was the way in which, over the years, a whole variety of exceptions and special cases were accounted for. One of the great benefits of V.A.T. is that it is a broadly based tax which will avoid some of the ridiculous anomalies that were part of the purchase tax system.

:In the further discussions with industry will the right hon. Gentleman make available in this House any discussion papers which are freely circulated to industry, and not conceal them as was the case when discussions took place previously?

:The discussions which the Customs and Excise will have will be based on published information. The discussions by that Department before my Budget statement and before the White Paper was issued were based on the Green Paper which has been put before the House. If we are to have the simplest V.A.T. in Europe, which I am determined we shall have, it is essential that the Customs and Excise, in its discussion with trade and industry, shall not be hamstrung in any way. I hope the House will agree with that attitude.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that the value-added tax on the basis introduced by my right hon. Friend has been extremely well received by industry, trade and commerce, and augurs well for the future—without prejudice to individual views that may be held about the Common Market?

Yes, I agree entirely with my hon. Friend. This is largely due to the enormous amount of work and consultations which were undertaken by the Customs and Excise.

Despite what the right hon. Gentleman says, is he aware that the other night his Minister of State seemed to indicate that he would not be prepared to consider in the Finance Bill debates any Amendment whatever? Does he not regard this as a gross discourtesy to the House, if not contempt? Will he make it quite clear that the debates will be seriously listened to, and that Amendments will be considered?

Any Amendments which are selected by the Chair will be debated and will be answered by a Treasury Minister. I have taken note of what I understand to be in the hon. Gentleman's mind, namely, that he will be prepared to listen to any answers that are given in those debates.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much his proposals for value-added tax will add to the price of children's clothing, school uniform, and footwear, respectively; and if he will make a statement.

No accurate estimates can be given, since the tax burdens on these goods resulting from imposition of V.A.T. will to some extent be offset by the abolition of S.E.T., the effects of which on individual goods cannot be quantified.

Would the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that schoolchildren take a fairly high proportion of a family income for school wear and footwear? When considering this matter, will he bear in mind the heavy cost involved in bringing up a young family?

Of course the heavy cost of bringing up a young family and many other factors concerned with the position of those on low incomes were borne in mind in the design of V.A.T. The hon. Gentleman will appreciate, when we are substituting V.A.T. for purchase tax and S.E.T., that purchase tax itself involves a tax burden on items such as food and housing, which of course will no longer bear those taxes under the V.A.T. system, because they will be zero rated. One must take the package as a whole. We have given a great deal of attention to the very kind of point which the hon. Gentleman has made.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the present exemption of children's shoes from purchase tax has been a factor in ensuring that British children's feet are net so deformed as those of Continental children? We should like to see this state of affairs continue under V.A.T.

:These are all matters which we can debate in Committee on the Finance Bill. The essential point is that there is no reason to suppose that V.A.T. as a whole will be regressive

:Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, apart from other considerations, the cost of school uniforms and children's clothing has for a long time been a positive scandal in this country and is hitting family life very hard. Has he not considered some form of inquiry into the effect on family life of the high cost of uniforms and other clothing?

:That is a different question. I shall carry out a survey myself, having one child of 1½ years and another of 3 years. As for the overall cost of the tax, as I said, it will not be regressive.

But my hon. Friend will know that for a very long time I have been asking for an assurance that those on low incomes—not those people whom one can help with State benefits—should be protected. Would it net be a good idea sometimes to ask ordinary people in the House, of whom there are many, whether the Treasury would not like a little advice from us? I do not think that the top Treasury officials live ordinary lives.

As I sought to indicate, in my personal experience I cannot be held to be out of touch with this issue. But the whole point is that in designing this tax we had in the forefront of our minds the question whether the tax would or would not be regressive. As I said, as a result of the way in which it is designed we do not believe that that is so.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will provide a table of the estimated changes in income distribution following the Budget Statement.

As we have explained previously to the hon. Member, it is not possible to provide a table of this kind.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the changes in income tax and surtax introduced by the Chancellor have given to the £20-a-week wage earner not an extra pound in his pocket, as the Chancellor has claimed, but only an extra 30p per week, while the £20,000-a-year tycoon is being given an extra £9 a week? Is he further aware that the Government are giving an extra £1 million a year to the poor through increased family income supplement, at the same time as they are giving an extra £300 million to the rich by cutting by half the tax on unearned income gains?

:One must take the Budget as a whole, and I refer the hon Gentleman to the specific points made by my right hon. Friend last night in the Budget debate in terms of the help that we have given to the poor—help which was not given by the previous Government.

:Dees my hon. Friend not agree that the prospective increase of more than a third in old-age pensions and other benefits over two years, allied to the introduction by this Government of a family incomes supplement, means that the recent survey which claimed that the Government have dealt much more effectively with the poor than did their predecessors is very close to the mark?

I very much agree with my hon. Friend. Our record and that of previous Conservative Administrations, compared with that of previous Labour Administrations, is a very favourable one indeed.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what percentage the value of the £ sterling has fallen since June, 1970.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the purchasing power of the £ sterling now, taking it as 100p on 18th June, 1970.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is the current value of the £sterling compared with June, 1970.

Taking the internal purchasing power of the £ sterling as l00p in mid-June, 1970, its value in mid-February, 1972, the latest date for which information is available, is estimated, on the basis of movements in the General Index of Retail Prices, to be 87½p. This is a fall of 12½ per cent.

:Is that not a shocking and miserable answer, especially for the poor, about whom we have heard so much in the past week? At the present rate of progress how long will it take for last week's alleged pound in the pocket to disappear down the drain altogether?

I believe my right hon. Friend dealt with that point in his speech last night. As was pointed out in an earlier answer, we have achieved considerable success in curtailing the rate of inflation. We are determined to continue that process.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the latest official figures show that inflation is again accelerating, that food prices are rising at a rate of 9½ per cent. a year, and that the Chancellor's purchase tax concession in the Budget last week will be wiped out in 25 days? What specific plans have the Government to stem the rise in the cost of living?

I do not accept the point made in the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question. This matter was clearly dealt with by my right hon. Friend in answer to an earlier question a few minutes ago. In view of the hon. Gentleman's long-standing interest in this subject, I would point out that I replied in answer to a previous question on the basis of the retail prices index in order to be consistent with a reply that I gave to a previous question. However, the latest consumer price index for 1971, which provides a better indication of changes in purchasing power, is available, and on that basis the adjustment in the retail price index shows a figure of 89p and a fall of 11 per cent. [An Hon. Member: "A fiddle."] It was not a fiddle. I thought it right to point out that I was giving an answer on a consistent basis in line with an earlier answer. As I have said, the latest figures throw up a figure of 89p and a fall of 11 per cent.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that for the low income earner who in June, 1970, was on £20 a week, this will represent a drop in real purchasing power of £2·50. So much for the pound in the pocket! When one bears in mind that millions of council tenants will also be subjected to an increase of a further pound this year and to successive increases, will the Minister be prepared to say that the present Government will give a guarantee that when eventually they go to the country the pound will not fall below 75p as compared with its value in June, 1970?

:The hon. Gentleman will be aware that more help will be given to the lowest-paid in terms of rents. This is a very important consideration and will assist people at the bottom end of the scale.

Does my hon. Friend not agree that the rise in real wages has been greater than the fall in the value of the pound? Secondly, if one takes the situation since capital gains tax was first introduced by the previous Administration, there has been a fall in the value of the pound by about 30 per cent.? Does it not mean that capital gains tax is a capital tax?

If I may answer the main point, it is not the case that the change in the value of money has led to a fall in real earnings. The latest national income estimates show that since we took office real personal disposable income has risen at an annual rate or about 3 per cent. compared with a rate of under 2 per cent. during the whole six years of the previous Administration's period in office.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the total lax relief allowed on mortgages in the last 12 months for which figures are available.

£300 million for the financial year 1970–71.

:I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Does not he agree that the recent increases in house prices inevitably caused by the apparent land shortage and inflation are most disconcerting? Since my right hon. Friend has seen fit to restore tax relief on all bank loans in his Budget, is there not a case for greater consideration to giving more widespread tax relief for owner occupation, which both parties want to encourage?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's point about the increase in house prices, but, subject to further consideration, I believe that the extent of the tax relief on mortgages is about right at the present time.

:While the Chancellor of the Exchequer assures us constantly of his concern about rising prices and general inflation, how can any Government of whatever colour have any worthwhile economic policy while allowing the ruthless exploitation of land and property values to dominate our economic affairs? Is not it a fact that while the right hon. Gentleman may be able to point to a small alleviation in the cost of living in terms of certain consumer goods, the enormous increase in land and property values lies at the root of our economic problems? This is the real starting point of inflation. The Government are so smug and self-satisfied that they allow this exploitation of land and property to go on at the rate of 25 per cent. a year on pre-existing values. When will the right hon. Gentleman do something about that?

This Question is about tax relief on mortgages. The hon. Gentleman raises a much wider point.

In contrast with the figure of £300 million that the right hon. Gentleman has just given, is it not a fact that the Government subsidy to council tenants is only £157 million a year? I do not want to take this relief away from owner-occupiers, but is not it utterly unfair to take it away from council tenants? Is not that precisely what the Government are doing by their statement on the Housing Finance Bill that they propose to reduce by up to £200 million a year the subsidy which would have gone to council tenants under the existing system?

The proposals for housing finance are absolutely right. I disagree entirely with the hon. Member for Salford, East (Mr. Frank Allaun).

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will now seek to establish machinery for the collection of statistics on the question of the relationship between the number of houses on which tax-relieved mortgages are held and the number of persons holding such mortgages.

No, Sir. This could only be done at disproportionate expense.

It is not at all difficult to do this. The truth is that the right hon. Gentleman and his right hon. and hon. Friends do not want to know about it There are roughly 15,000 people who are getting mortgages on more than one house. Is not it the case that many friends of the right hon. Gentleman in the Conservative Party are among those who are getting relief on more than one house? It is not so much the case that the Government find it difficult to find out about it; they do not want to know. While they are refusing to know about people getting two mortgages on one horse, they are busily engaged in cutting council house subsidies. Will the right hon. Gentleman look at this again?

It is difficult. It means getting individual returns from building societies on each amount of interest paid or collecting the information from the taxpayer. It would mean a large amount of work in the tax districts at a time when they are already carrying a heavy burden in making the tax changes. As to those who get this relief, as the rules stood after the previous Administration altered them it was equally possible for anyone to get a second mortgage—even for such purposes as adding a wing to an existing house and at the same time buying another house on a new mortgage—and still get full relief. That is how the previous Administration left it.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the right hon. Gentleman's replies, I beg to give notice that I shall seek an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will seek to reconstitute the official portfolio of United States dollar stocks and shares.

No, Sir.

Why not, briefly? Would it not be sensible, now that our reserves are at the highest level ever, and steadily increasing, for the Government to try to maximise the return that they receive on them—or is the Chancellor of the Exchequer afraid that they will be severely diminished as a result of the measures incorporated in the Budget?

I must confess that the relevance of the last part of the hon. Gentleman's remarks eludes me. I cannot be drawn into detailed comments about the disposition and management of the reserves. The broad aim is to achieve a satisfactory balance between liquidity, safety and the rate of return.

:Without the dollar portfolio, the last Government would have been hard-pressed on this reserve position. Therefore, our hidden reserves have been of great value to us in the past, whether they were United States or other stocks. There is advantage in considering that whole matter. Will my hon. Friend give further thought to it?

I do not necessarily dissent from my hon. Friend's view. This is a matter concerned with the broad management of reserves, to which a great deal of thought is given. But, on the original Question, it is important to look forward and not backward.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if, in the light of recent discussions between the Government and the Trades Union Congress, he will make a further statement on Government policy in relation to prices and incomes.

I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said on 21st March.—[Vol. 833. c. 1338–9.]

:Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is time that the Government started to take seriously some of the constructive proposals coming forward from the trade unions, especially that suggesting that there should be a serious examination of the possibility of introducing threshold wage agreements? If the Government took them a little more seriously, would they not be in a better position to expect co-operation?

:The hon. Gentleman is misinformed. I was in the Chair at the November meeting of the National Economic Development Council. At that meeting both the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. were invited to consider the practical implications of threshold agreements. The subject was also raised when, with my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and other colleagues, I met the T.U.C. on 9th March. The Government cannot reach a general conclusion on such agreements until they have been fully discussed and considered and until we have had a chance of considering and discussing with the C.B.I. and the T.U.C. their views.

:Bearing in mind that threshold agreements simply institutionalise inflation, will my right hon. Friend think carefully before agreeing to finance the current and capital requirements of the nationalised industries from the printing press to enable them to play ball with the C.B.I. for another year?

On the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, if I understand him correctly, he is right in suggesting that no one can say that in principle threshold agreements are good or bad. One has to see how they will work out, and one has to consider them and discuss them with the parties concerned. On the second part of my hon. Friend's question, I do not think that what he suggests is justified by the facts.

:The hon. Member for South Angus (Mr. Bruce-Gardyne) suggested that threshold agreements were bad. Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that cost-of-living agreements with the unions have been very successful on the Continent, where the rate of inflation has been rather lower?

I agree with the hon. and learned Gentleman that we should consider carefully the advantages and disadvantages of threshold agreements. We have said that we will do this. I made that clear at the N.E.D.C. meeting and I suggested that both sides of industry should go away after that meeting and consider the matters, and that then we should have an opportunity of discussing the considered views on both the C.B.I. and the T.U.C.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what measures he now intends to take to help the long-term unemployed.

Our policies for faster and sustained growth over a number of years, the new incentives for industrial development in the regions of high unemployment—where the numbers of long-term unemployed are greatest—and the major reorganisation of training facilities are all designed to reduce the duration as well as the level of unemployment.

:Those words were fine, but can the hon. Gentleman guarantee that the actions will significantly reduce the number of 250,000 men who have now been unemployed for longer than six months and have lost their earnings-related benefit? Is he prepared to recommend that the earnings-related benefits should be paid to men who are unemployed for 12 months and that unemployment benefit should be paid to men who are unemployed for two years?

Concerning whether it is a question of words or actions, my right hon. Friend's Budget Statement last week included a substantial number of actions designed to help with the problem to which the hon. Gentleman understandably and rightly draws attention.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House how much it costs to employ a man in terms of S.E.T. and national insurance stamp before so much as a penny is paid in wages? Does he agree that the premium is one of the main causes of our unemployment problem today?

:I cannot give my hon. and learned Friend a specific answer without notice. If he cares to put down a Question I will seek to answer it.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his latest estimate of the total reduction in taxation since he became Chancellor, including the measures in his 1972 Budget Statement.

In the coming year, over £3,000 million.

Is it not evident that the benefits of that reduction, which is a welcome contrast to the extra burdens imposed by the last Government, will be appreciated by millions of people in all sections of the community?

Yes, Sir. That is certainly true. As I said last night in winding up the Budget debate, it is not only taxpayers who have done well out of this Government, but pensioners and families on low incomes.

:What is the increase in the amount paid out in unemployment benefit over the same period?

The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that if he puts down a Question he will get the answer. I am rather surprised that the hon. Gentleman, of all people, should believe that he can divert the attention of the British people away from the cuts in taxation which we have made by that kind of supplementary question.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his latest estimate is of the United Kingdom contribution to the European Economic Community Agricultural Fund, in view of the rise of 8 per cent. proposed by the European Economic Community Commission for farm prices.

The Council of Ministers reached decisions at the end of last week on farm prices for the coming year. We are still studying the implications of these decisions. There are a number of other factors to be taken into account as well as the Council's decision, notably the course of world prices.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the average figure should be 6½ per cent. and not 8 per cent.? In view of the rising prices in the world market and, indeed, our own prices, which are going up, the increased contribution could be minimal. Will he give the House his estimate of the effect on the cost of living, which should be only minimal as well?

I accept what my hon. Friend has said. I think that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food is to answer a Question on the effect of food prices tomorrow.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement following his recent discussions in London with M. Werner.

Yes, Sir. We had a full discussion covering both international and European monetary matters. This meeting prepared the way for the further discussion which I had with E.E.C. Finance Ministers in Brussels on 6th March.

In view of M. Werner's laudable interest in procuring more stable conditions in European currency markets, may I ask my right hon. Friend to initiate a detailed study of the conditions which make for variations in the real value of currencies so that if changes in currencies have to be made they can be made as small and predictable as possible?

I will certainly consider what why hon. Friend has suggested.

:Will the Chancellor convey to his colleagues in the E.E.C. and to the Commission that Britain has a great deal to gain from monetary and economic union if, but only if, regional policies are adequately pursued by the Community? Will he state what representations he has made on the need for proper regional policies?

The Community has always stressed the importance of an effective regional policy, and those in the Community recognise the particular problems of some of the older industrial conurbations of the United Kingdom. I had a meeting with the Finance Ministers of the Six and the other acceding countries in Brussels on 6th March. It was a private meeting, but I did certainly discuss the whole question of regional policy and I made clear what the wishes of the United Kingdom were.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he will make a statement on the policy of Her Majesty's Government towards the proposal that developing countries should be represented at the Group of Ten.

As my right hon. Friend has said on previous occasions, we sympathise with the desire of developing countries to play a proper part in discussions of international monetary questions. They already do so in the I.M.F. Board. The Government support the discussions now taking place within the I.M.F. to find ways in which they can be given a more effective voice

Would the right hon. Gentleman not agree that the Group of Ten exclusively represents a minority of nations but that its decisions have far-reaching implications for the majority of human society, which is in no way represented at its meetings? Does this not amount to economic imperialism? What are we going to do about it?

I do not think that it is correct to draw that conclusion. The Group of Ten is a group of countries which have a formal agreement to lend their currencies to the I.M.F. It is very difficult to add to it very readily. Certainly, my right hon. Friend the Chancellor would pay full attention to the views of the other countries when he is dealing in the Group of Ten. Other arrangements are being discussed. The problem, of course, is to devise a body which is small enough to be effective and yet also meets the desire of a large number of countries to have their say.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make a statement on the progress of discussions with the International Monetary Fund regarding the repayment of United Kingdom indebtedness incurred between October, 1964, and June, 1970, due on 20th June, 1972.

:The discussions are at a preliminary stage. There is nothing to report yet. As my right hon. Friend said in his Budget Statement, he hopes a solution will soon be found.

I am grateful for that reply, as far as it goes. Is not the Bank of England somewhat to blame for having got us into this pickle by replacing the gold squandered by the last Government in their fatuous attempts to defend an out-dated exchange rate with virtually worthless dollars? Has my hon. Friend noted the report in today's Financial Times that the United States Treasury is thinking of selling gold from its own stocks on the free market? Will the Government make it clear to the United States Treasury that that would be quite unacceptable so long as it is declining to transfer gold in payment for dollars due.

On the first part of my hon. Friend's supplementary question, we clearly must take responsibility for the general management of these affairs.

:Does the Minister agree that it would be injudicious for Her Majesty's Government to embark on discussions in the international monetary sphere which look like taking the posture of being anti-American at the present time?

In all these matters it is important to work on a co-operative basis. The speech made by Secretary Connally on 15th March indicates that there is reason to hope that a solution to the problem will be found.

:Will my hon. Friend explain in simple terms why it is that if a debtor offers his debt at the right time and place in the currency arranged in the original contract and it is not accepted that does not make him quit of further obligation?

:I am afraid that the simpler the explanation the longer it tends to become. I hesitate to try to do it at Question Time. There are complications in these matters. The question of which currency is used is very important. A number of parties are involved: the United States, because the dollar is not convertible, the United Kingdom as the fund's debtor, and other currencies are involved in the situation as they are at present in a position to benefit from the fund.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that if the United States were to make a drawing from the fund—which would be the normal practice for a country which had incurred heavy deficits if the dollar is not treated as separate from all other currencies—it would break the log-jam and enable the payment, as well as a number of other transactions, to take place without difficulty?

I hesitate to give a specific answer to that question. I will look into the matter and write to the right hon. Gentleman.

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will list the companies in which the Government have an outstanding interest in the form of share loans and which have received grants in the past five years, and the Government nominees to the boards of such companies.

With permission, I will circulate the information in the Official Report.

Does the right hon. Gentleman agree that it is a long list and likely to get longer in view of the Government's theoretical non-interventionist view in relation to industry? However, as the Government are likely to expand their activities in regional development, will the right hon. Gentleman consider making a further statement on the terms of reference which the Government are likely to give to the directors of such companies?

I have a great deal of sympathy with what the hon. Gentleman

asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what is his estimate of the cost of introducing and issuing a 50p note to replace half of the 50p coins.

The additional costs could well be several million pounds. man is seeking. I think that the whole House would agree that two important matters are involved; first, that where the Government supply money they have a right to the necessary information and, secondly, that they have the capacity to protect the taxpayers' money which they have either loaned or invested. We are studying these matters. If we have anything further to say I will make a statement or write to the hon. Gentleman.

:Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us what criteria will be applied by the new executive in making grants to companies? Will they be primarily related to sectoral considerations or to regional development considerations?

:That is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry. This question is concerned with the protection of the money and relations with the Government when they have supplied it.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that although it is such a large sum it would be a very small price to pay to restore the psychological respectability of 50p? Does he realise that the 50p piece is causing a great deal of damage to all the male pockets in this country? Will he bear that in mind when considering whether to introduce a 50p note?

:Alas, not so much damage as the pockets and purses were apparently causing to the 50p notes. This is a matter of cost. If we were to have both circulated together, many of the economies of having the coins circulating would be lost.