asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will make a further statement on the allocation among public bodies of increased Government expenditure to assist the machine tool industry.

The estimated allocation between public bodies is:

Is the Secretary of State aware that, although I am grateful for that information, confidence has still not returned to the machine tool industry, particularly Alfred Herbert in Coventry? What steps does he intend to take to improve the public accountability of this money when it is spent? Can he ensure that none of it is spent on imported machine tools?

In relation to the programme, details of which I have just given, it is not possible to discriminate against imported machine tools under international trading arrangements. I have every hope and expectation that a very large proportion of this money will go to home manufactured machine tools.

On 28th April my right hon. Friend made a very helpful state ment in Manchester about the Bill which he intended to introduce to give financial aid to the regions. Will that help the machine tool and engineering industries in the Manchester area?

Yes; there is no reason why the arrangements which were those largely contained in the statement I made to the House on 22nd March should not apply to the machine tool industry. Indeed, I imagine that the machine tool industry itself will be coming forward with good inquiries on this subject.

In view of the very great anxiety in the industry, will the Secretary of State tell the House whether there is any progress with the pre-production order scheme which guarantees the money spent on British machine tools? Will he give the House an estimate of the amount he is now making available which is likely to be spent on machine tools from abroad under a Government scheme to help the British industry?

I cannot make any "guestimate" about the amount which will be spent on machine tools from abroad, but I should think it will be a very small proportion. The response to the pre-production scheme has not been as great as one would have hoped and it has not been an extensive help to the industry so far.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement regarding the proposed duration of the present package of regional incentives offered to industry.

As announced in the White Paper on Industrial and Regional Development, Cmnd. 4942, the Government intend to maintain the new system at least until the transitional period of entry to Europe is over, that is to 1st January, 1978.

Does the Under-Secretary of State concede, having learned lessons from two rapid changes in regional policy, that the House should consider the promotion of a Select Committee on regional policy? Will the hon. Gentleman consult his right hon. and hon. Friends with that end in view?

I should think that is not necessarily the general view, in view of the recent announcement and the fact that a Bill will soon be brought before the House to implement it.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that a combination of bribes for the establishment of branch factories and the provision of taxpayers' subsidies for operations not obviously enjoying the prospect of commercial viability was not very successful when tried before? Therefore, will he not rule out the posibility of reviewing the operation of this package in less than six years?

To give certainty to industry, we stand by the announcement made by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In asking the first part of his supplementary question my hon. Friend probably overlooked the fact that the incentives we offer are three times more beneficial to profitable firms than to non-profitable firms.

Although assurances have been given about the duration of the new system of regional incentives, no assurances have been given, as far as I am aware, about the level of grants. As it is six weeks since the Chancellor made his Budget statement, may I ask what assurances have been given in that respect?

I have said that we should maintain the system. The level of assistance is now very generous and I cannot foresee that any substantial increase would be justified.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what are the latest estimates of the subsonic noise levels for Concorde.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will obtain a progress report from the manufacturers and make a statement upon the work being done on reducing the noise levels of Concorde at landing and take-off to no worse than those produced by Trident III; BAC1-11, Boeing 747–200B, and Tristar, respectively.

Considerable effort is being devoted to reduce Concorde's engine noise to the lowest practicable level and regular progress reports are received by the Department from the manufacturers. But it has always been recognised that it would not be practicable to reduce the noise to the levels of those aircraft mentioned by my hon. Friend the Member for Heston and Isle-worth (Mr. Hayhoe). The manufacturers' estimates are that at entry into service Concorde's noise will be comparable to that of Boeing 707, DC8 and VC10.

Is the Minister aware that there is very great concern among people living near London Airport about the amount of noise that Concorde will make on take-off and landing? I believe that the hon. Gentleman's hon. Friend has given an assurance that efforts will be made to try to keep the noise of Concorde to the level of the Boeing 707 and the VCIO, but is he aware that those two aircraft are the noisiest of their own generation of jets, and if Concorde is to be even noisier than they are, or at least if the noise of Concorde cannot be kept to the level of their noise, it will be unacceptable to people living near London Airport?

I know that there is great concern, some of which I believe is misplaced. The imputation which the hon. Gentleman makes, that Concorde will be even noisier, is not borne out by the answer that I have given. The noise of Concorde will be broadly comparable, and the figures which are available in the answer given by my hon. Friend the Minister for Aerospace to the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) last Thursday give the precise measurements.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that the DC 850 is considerably noisier than the Boeing 707 or the VC 10? Would he not also agree that the anti-social noises of which people rightly complain are the noises of flyover and approach as aircraft come in to land and take off? Would he not further agree that Concorde's noise problem will be sideline noise at the airport, and that it is not the airport mechanics who complain of noise?

I commend my hon. Friend to look again at the figures given last Thursday relating to approach and take-off. As regards sideline noises, the manufacturers forecast that the Concorde will be broadly comparable to existing types. This means that its place in the scale will he between the Boeing 707 and the VC10.

It is unfortunate that the noise certification scheme came into being after the 1966 Lancaster House noise conference. At that time Concorde's airframe and aero engines were being produced and were not caught up in the scheme. But at the moment, comparing it with present civilian aircraft, the Concorde will be among the noisiest on takeoff and flyover and the second noisiest on landing. Therefore, is it not incumbent upon the Government to explain what progress is being made towards a quieter engine and in what time scale?

The right hon. Gentleman has had a very substantial explanation given to him already. We are doing our utmost to quieten the aircraft, and I deprecate these alarmist statements that he insists on making.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will give the latest estimate for development costs of the Concorde supersonic transport aircraft.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much has been spent to date on Concorde; and what is the latest estimate for total development costs.

I refer the hon. Members to the reply given by my hon. Friend the Minister for Aerospace to the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) on 4th May.—[Vol. 836, c. 207–8.]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that answer, but may we known whether the rise of £115 million since December, 1970, means that the United Kingdom will have to find another £57 million? Further, could some light be shed on the "additional development tasks" put down in Thursday's answer at £25 million, and, in particular, how much of this money has been spent on quieting?

First, may I set the figures right with my hon. Friend? In fact, unless my mathematics are sorely wrong, the increase since December, 1970, is £85 million, the figure having risen from £885 million to £970 million. It is correct to suppose that the broad allocation of cost between the two partners is equivalent.

Will the Secretary of State be making any form of operating subsidy available to BOAC for the operation of Concorde? In view of the almost £1,000 million now being spent on Concorde, would it not be the final insult if an operating subsidy to fly business men to and from New York were to be added to the money already spent?

As the hon. Gentleman knows, the manufacturers of the aircraft are in negotiation with BOAC. BOAC has made no request to me for a subsidy, so the matter has not arisen so far as I am concerned; but I take the hon. Gentleman's point, and I shall be keeping the matter under careful review.

In view of the effect of the increased costs on the economics of Concorde's operation, and the continued uncertainty about supersonic flying rights and landing rights, is it not clear that an order placed by BOAC within the next few months must be done on other than a normal commercial basis, and this must be obvious to other airlines as well? In the circumstances, is it not time that we had a White Paper about all this and a debate in the House, before going further with the project, so that the right hon. Gentleman may distinguish between those of us who would like to see Concorde successful but want far more information than the Government have so far given and those whom he considers are concerned simply with "knocking" the aircraft?

The hon. Gentleman is rather ungenerous to the answers given by my hon. Friend the Minister for Aerospace last week. I thought that he replied most fully to the right hon. Member for Barnsley and gave a wide range of information. The hon. Gentleman is seeking to go into the uncertain field of hypothesis, and that I am not prepared to do.

Is not this development money well spent, in that, in the 1970s, if airlines such as Air France, TWA, Pan-Am and BOAC do order Concorde, they will at last have a balanced fleet, allowing them to have Concorde aircraft which will cream off premium traffic and also wide-bodied airliners more suitable to leisure traffic?

I believe that Concorde will be enormously welcome to a very important part of the travelling public.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will give a general direction to the British Steel Corporation to take full advantage of the opportunities presented to them by the development of North Sea oil.

No, Sir, the British Steel Corporation is well aware of the opportunities afforded by this development.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that is the type of complacent answer which we have come to expect from his Department? Is he further aware that of the platform steel required for developing North Sea oil, the British Steel Corporation is supplying only 40 per cent. and that 60 per cent. is coming from Europe? The British Steel Corporation pleads that it cannot meet the delivery dates and that the schedules are far too tight. Yet the European firms can meet them. Will the hon. Gentleman inquire into this?

I think the hon. Gentleman does less than justice to the British Steel Corporation. In the face of very fierce international competition it has secured some large orders—for example, the BP overland pipeline, amounting to £5·5 million. I see no reason why the Corporation should not gain further orders.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he is yet able to make an announcement on future investment in the steel industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he is now able to make a statement on the second report of the Joint Steering Group of the Steel Industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now make a statement on future investment in the steel industry.

I would ask the hon. Members to await the statement at the end of Questions.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now designate Luton aerodrome under Section 29 of the Civil Aviation Act, 1971.

My officials are discussing the question of night movements in 1973 with the authorities at Luton. Meanwhile I see no need to take a decision on designation.

If my hon. Friend's officials are discussing night movements with Luton, may I express the hope that they are informing Luton that the Government will not tolerate night take-offs from Luton in the same way as they allow night take-offs from Heathrow? Is my hon. Friend aware that the operators at Luton are very near to producing their programmes for 1973 and that unless they have a firm statement from the Government about what steps are going to be taken, they are very liable to produce an even bigger programme than this year? That programme is quite intolerable to people living under the flight path

I do not think I could hold out any hope to my hon. Friend of a complete ban on night movements from Luton in 1973. If operators are forming plans at this stage they would be well advised to wait until we have completed these discussions because they might find that they had to change their plans.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what study he has made of the economic effects on the car industry of proposals for legislation requiring greater pollution control: and if he will make a statement.

The only proposal so far announced is the control of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbon exhaust emission from cars. It will have little effect on car prices and no adverse economic effect on the industry. Full account will be taken of the economic effects of any further proposals.

Does the hon. Gentleman not agree that there is considerable international agreement on the need to control pollution from motor cars? Will he therefore enter into early negotiations with the industry to ensure that legislation can be introduced at the earliest opportunity? In doing so, will he bear in mind that any increase in the manufacturing input into motor cars would greatly increase the number of employment opportunities in the motor-car industry?

I appreciate what the hon. Gentleman says. The Department of the Environment takes the lead in this issue, but my Department works in close cooperation with that Department, and I can assure the hon. Gentleman that there will be the fullest possible consultation with industry before the new measures are announced.

In the consultations which the Minister will be having with the Department of the Environment, will he point out that the motorist is already a fairly heavily laden member of society and that any inhibitions laid upon motor manufacturers should derive from proven health hazards and not from any trendy concern with pollution?

I can assure the hon. Gentleman that I will convey those remarks to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for the Environment.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will issue a direction to area electricity boards to revise the formula used for calculating maximum resale prices allowable under Section 29 of the Electricity Act, 1957.

No, Sir. Determining the formula is a matter for the boards themselves.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the formula used for this purpose by all area boards in England and Wales allows landlords to make a legal profit during periods of heavy consumption of one-tenth of a new penny for each additional unit of electricity consumed? Will he make this practice illegal?

The hon. Gentleman knows from correspondence which he has received that the overcharge that is made of 1p is over the minimum rate, which is to compensate for the higher rate that is charged on initial units. This is reckoned to be a fair average and does not amount to an illegal profit.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make use of his powers under the Weights and Measures Act, 1963, to rectify the anomaly whereby breakfast cereals in flake form must be sold in standardised quantities while other forms are excluded from this requirement.

The Department will be discussing with the manufacturers whether it would be practicable and convenient to extend the present arrangements to some other types of breakfast cereal.

In thanking my hon. Friend for that slightly more favourable reply than I usually receive, may I ask him whether he would not agree that it is time that one Minister was responsible for consumer protection rather than the variety to which we have become accustomed, including the Minister for Aerospace on the last occasion?

I am, of course, answering in my capacity as Under-Secretary of State to my right hon. Friend the Minister. If my hon. Friend is grateful for that advance, I shall be happy to discuss the matter with her over lunch, tea or dinner on any mutually convenient occasion.

When the Under-Secretary has recovered from his previous answer, will he, in view of the awakening interest of his back benchers in the subject of consumer protection, look at the possibility of setting up the Consumer Council again or some counterpart to it?

I am aware of my hon. Friends' interest in this matter, but I do not think that it necessarily extends as far as the hon. Gentleman suggests.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the value of British aerospace exports in 1971.

Figures published in the December, 1971, issue of the Overseas Trade Statistics show that exports of aircraft, engines and parts—excluding second-hand aircraft—totalled £303 million.

Will my hon. Friend affirm that these excellent figures have continued into January and February, 1972, and will he affirm also that they are due to work or projects started under the Conservative Government of 1959–64, and that very little has occurred since?

I am very hopeful that the level will be sustained and even improved over the next few years. Obviously, export orders for aircraft depend upon decisions taken some time ago, and I am bound to reflect that if the TSR2 had not been cancelled the figures might have been even better.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects to announce the results of his special review into compensation for the victims of mining subsidence damage: and if he will make a statement.

Much work remains to be done before any conclusion can be announced.

The news that the special review is in hand will be welcomed by thousands of families in my constituency and other mining areas, but will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the provisions of the 1957 Act do not allow full compensation for the financial costs involved, let alone the great physical and mental suffering? Will he give an assurance that, when the review is complete, he will introduce legislation as soon as possible to allow significantly greater compensation than that provided for under the 1957 Act?

I am well aware of my hon. Friend's deep interest in this matter both in his constituency and generally. Legislation will be introduced if it should prove necessary, but my hon. Friend will appreciate that the issues are complex and that it will take time for the review to be completed. Consultations are being held with local authority associations and others.

Will the Minister take it that in the Whitefield area of Lancashire a serious situation has arisen, in that neighbours of mine tried to sell their house but found that the intended purchaser could not obtain a mortgage because of the danger of subsidence, and all they could elicit from the National Coal Board was an assurance that it would meet its obligations? This is wholly unsatisfactory, since the vendors simply could not sell their house. Will the hon. Gentleman, therefore, make the strongest possible representations to the National Coal Board to ensure that it fulfils its obligations to the letter of the law?

That point is one of the matters which will be considered in the review. In advance of the review, I cannot say what changes, if any, will be made.

Everyone with experience of the problem of mining subsidence agrees that the present situation is not entirely satisfactory, but will the hon. Gentleman take it that, to my knowledge, the 1957 Act has been administered in a most liberal way by the National Coal Board, and that in many cases people who have suffered damage from old mining operations, sometimes going back as far as 100 years, have received compensation from the Board out of its own resources for troubles left behind by the old coal owners who never paid a penny for anything?

I am sure that those remarks will be noted by the National Coal Board

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimates his Department has made of the effect on overall noise levels in the vicinity of airports which will be made by the increasing use of quiet engines and improved operating techniques by the year 1985

The latest estimates are included in the document. "Maplin Airport—Choice of Sites for Runways ", which was published on 12th April by my right hon. friend the Secretary of State for the Environment. They relate to conventional take-off and landing aircraft, including supersonic aircraft, and show an expected average noise reduction in 1985 of more than 8 PNdB per aircraft movement. They do not take into account improved operating techniques.

But will not my hon. Friend agree that, as those figures published by the Secretary of State show that the figures given to the Roskill Commission were in considerable technical error, we ought now to consider whether the best way to spend public money on improving the environment is to build noisy motorways through East London to get to a quiet airport?

I recognise my hon. Friend's constituency interest in this matter, but I should point out that it will be of great benefit not only to the users of the airport at Maplin but also to residents around Heathrow and Gatwick that we may expect this considerable reduction in overall noise levels.

Will the Under-Secretary of State repudiate the innuendo concealed in this Question and in a great deal of the stuff which has come out today? If there are engines available quieter than those now being used, where are they, and who is selling them?

I did not detect any such innuendo. Quiet engines have been developed for wide-bodied subsonic aircraft, but we cannot at the moment forecast any massive introduction into service of similar engines for smaller subsonic aircraft or supersonic aircraft.

What does all that mean? I also have a constituency interest. To the plain man, does it mean that the aircraft travelling over my part of England will be less noisy in the foreseeable future?

It will mean that some of them will certainly be less noisy, but my hon. Friend seems to have an equal interest with my hon. Friend the Member for Epping (Mr. Tebbit) in the development of quieter motor cars.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will introduce an order to compel manufacturers of chocolate bars and similar confectionery to state the correct weight on such products, where this is less than three ounces.

It would be unrealistic to consider any change in the quantity marking provisions at the present time. This is because of draft EEC directives covering chocolate and sugar confectionery bars which would raise this limit slightly. In the discussions in Brussels, in which the United Kingdom has been participating, officials have had consumer interests very much in mind.

Will my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary accept that in this question I am not so much concerned with aero-space as with space where there should be Aero? Will he not agree that notwithstanding all the EEC regulations the people who purchase smaller units of confectionery are entitled at least to the same limited measures of consumer protection as are afforded to the purchasers of larger units, especially as the former are usually children who in their simplicity believe that a new size means a bigger size, when often it can mean a smaller and dearer size?

I am sure my hon. Friend knows there is a difficulty here. But per-haps she will welcome the information that some manufacturers already declare the weight on smaller bars voluntarily and I expect that, like me, she would like to see the practice followed more widely.

From the Under-Secretary's original reply, are we to take it that even though this is a very good Question, a matter which should be acted upon, we can do nothing because the Community has decided otherwise and that we must be dictated to by the Common Market even before we join?

I thought the hon. Member had probably given up chocolate and sugar confectionery. He is wrong in his conclusion. There is plenty we can do and particularly we can encourage manufacturers to go voluntarily beyond the limits which are already set by law.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the total debt outstanding to finance houses and retailers at the end of January, 1972; and whether he will make a statement.

The information is given in Table 160 of the Monthly Digest of Statistics for March, 1972. This shows that instalment debt owing to finance houses and retailers totalled £1,643 million.

Is this not the highest figure ever and does it not prove that the Government are getting the economy moving again? Will my right hon. Friend tell us when in the past four years the figures were at their lowest?

I do not have available the statistics to which my hon. Friend refers. The figure for January was exceeded in February and exceeded yet again in March, so it is correct to say that as an indicator of the level of trade the figures are still fairly encouraging.

Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us what rate of interest was being paid by borrowers to the finance houses?

The rate of interest would depend upon the nature of the article. the term of the loan and the validity of the borrower.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will introduce legislation to protect consumers from the approaches and techniques of doorstep salesmen.

The Government are considering very sympathetically those recommendations of the Crowther Committee on Consumer Credit which relate to door-to-door selling. The Government have no other plans for legislation in this field; they consider that adverse publicity is one of the most effective means of countering undesirable door-step selling techniques.

Is the Minister aware that, on the contrary, I have plans for dealing with this matter and that I shall be introducing a Ten-Minute Rule Bill on the subject tomorrow, which I am sure he will look at sympathetically? But is the Minister also aware that there are large wealthy organisations which deliberately instruct their salesmen to conceal the fact that they are selling something in order to worm their way into people's homes? Once they are in they indulge in an equally dishonest form of patter again to conceal the fact that they are selling something in order to induce the unwitting housewife to part with a vast sum of money, usually for goods which are pretty useless. Does the right hon. Gentleman not feel that legislation is needed at least to put the housewife on an equal footing?

I was aware of the hon. Member's interest and of his intention to introduce a Ten-Minute Rule Bill tomorrow. Perhaps we should wait and see what the Bill contains before I give any indication of the Government's approval or disapproval.

Would my right hon. Friend the Minister bear in mind that in recent years there have been increasing encroachments on the liberty of the individual on the doorstep and that he should resist the blandishments of salesmen. from whatever quarter they may come, including Accrington?

Yes. In the whole of last year only three complaints of this sort came to my Department. So far this year the rate has increased because already we have had three, but it is not a very great number.

Is the Minister aware that it is quite ridiculous more than 12 months after the Crowther Report to say that the Government are only" considering sympathetically "action that Crowther then thought should be taken? Will the Government introduce legislation? If so, when will it be? Will it be this Session or next? If it is next Session, it will be more than two years after the Crowther Report before the Government eventually get their legislation through.

Quite a lot of legislation has been going through the House and there will be quite a lot next year. I cannot say therefore when this will be dealt with.

Will my right hon. Friend the Minister bear in mind that not as many housewives are as hen-witted as some hon. Members seem to imagine and that there is a limit to the amount of consumer protection they need?

I am certainly aware of what my hon. Friend says. This is reflected in the fact that only three complaints were made to my Department in the whole of last year. This is a serious problem but it is getting very much better.

Is it not a matter of wonder that in answer to a previous Question we saw hon. Members opposite regarding the piling-up of huge debts by consumers as a significant mark of their party's success? Would it not be equally logical for the Minister now to give every encouragement to doorstep salesmen in order to carry on the alleged success of his Government?

No. Sir.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what are the respective certification fees for the British-made HM2 sidewall hovercraft and the Italian-made H57 hydrofoil; and if he will make a statement.

Operation of the HM2 hovercraft is at present regulated by a permit to fly, costing £1, backed by a Certificate of Construction and Performance, issued free. The H57 hydrofoil requires a ship's passenger certificate and, under certain circumstances, a radio certificate at a total cost of £147·20 plus any surveyors' attendance costs abroad. New fees based on actual costs for certification of both hovercraft and hydrofoils will be introduced shortly.

When these new fees are introduced, will the Minister make sure there is no discouragement of the British-made hovercraft compared with its direct rival, the hydrofoil?

I think the important thing is that the new fees should represent accurately the costs involved and I do not know that the manufacturers, who have been consulted, I believe, in the drawing-up of the scale of fees, are as anxious about this as the hon. Member may suggest.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Indus try what evidence is now available showing the beneficial results in Scotland of the new regional policies.

The Department's Office for Scotland has received a number of inquiries concerning projects that may benefit under the new policies.

Is the Minister aware that that is an extremely vague answer, even from this Government? Does he not recognise that the recent unemployment figures, seasonally adjusted, are still showing an increase, and can he give up-to-date figures showing evidence of increased investment in Scotland?

So far from an increase, unemployment in Scotland fell slightly in April, although it did not fall enough. But I recognise entirely the problem in Scotland and it is precisely for this reason that the new policies were announced. It is far too early, in advance of having the Bill passed, to expect anything more than I have indicated, namely, that a number of inquiries have been made which will benefit from the new policies.

Will the Minister explain what benefits are expected from the Government's decision for the second time to raise the level of control over IDC certificates in the non-development areas, particularly in areas like mine, where all the incoming industry has been of 10,000 sq. ft. or less?

The IDC limitations were lifted for relatively small projects because it was found that in the main those projects were not susceptible of being moved to development areas. The IDC policy still remains an essential part of the Government's regional policy, but it would not help the regions, particularly Scotland, to kill off the seed corn of small firms in other parts of the country.

What improvement in the unemployment situation does the right hon. Gentleman expect for Scotland by next winter? Is he aware that the Minister dealing with the regions, speaking in South Wales at the weekend, made it clear that there would be little or no improvement in the unemployment situation in Wales by next winter? Will there be any improvement in Scotland?

I will not make any forecasts about unemployment, but it should be quite apparent that the measures which my right hon. Friend the Chancellor announced in our new policy, which was the biggest-ever incentive to invest, Will assist British industry and thus, in due course, help in dealing with the problem of unemployment.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what total tonnage of coal, deep mined and opencast, was mined in Great Britain during the 12 months ended 30th April, 1972; what tonnage was imported in the same period; and what was the total cost of such imports, cost, insurance and freight value at British ports.

Total coal production, deep mined and opencast, in the 52 weeks ended 22nd April was 119 million tons. In the 12 months to the end of March, 5 million tons were imported at a total c.i.f. cost of £49 million. Production figures are published in the Department's Weekly Statistical Statement and imports in the monthly Overseas Trade Statistics.

I read the figures assiduously every week. But will my hon. Friend bear in mind that the £49 million of coal imports is a dreadful and unnecessary burden on the balance of payments? Can he say what estimates he has made of tonnage needed to bring total coal output up to requirements in the next 12 months in order to eliminate imports of coal altogether?

The question whether it is wise to import is a matter of judgment by merchants and consumers. The total amount of the imports is marginal. My lion. Friend will be aware that imports of certain high-grade coals can help towards the consumption of lower-grade domestic coals in generating stations.

Is the Minister aware that in my consituency it was announced over the weekend that vast new seams of coal have been discovered? Will he consider ways and means of trying to exploit these new seams and help deal with the question of importing coal?

I am sure that that is a matter which the National Coal Board will be looking at with considerable interest.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he will make the new separation schemes in the Channel mandatory for British ships.

I expect the necessary Statutory Instrument to be made this month to come into operation in the late summer.

Does my right hon. Friend contemplate any further measures of control in Channel waters to help avoid collisions and to provide a safe seaway?

A firm of consultants is investigating the technical feasibility of introducing a Channel navigation service. We expect to receive its report in June. But that is as much as I can say about definite plans now.

Will the right hon. Gentleman also consider extending the pilotage area and defining more clearly what are dangerous cargoes, especially now that there are the super-tankers and other hazardous vessels, and then introducing compulsory pilotage on those vessels?

These are different questions, but I am very much aware of them, and in due course I hope to be able to help with what the right hon. Gentleman asks.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made in negotiations with the European Economic Community regarding textiles.

The Community does not yet have a common commercial policy for textiles generally. We have begun discussions with the Commission about the underlying principles of such a policy which will take time to evolve.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that if quotas had not been introduced this year import penetration of the home textiles market would have rocketed from 53 per cent. to around 85 per cent.? As it is clear from the Common Market negotiations that quotas cannot be maintained after entry, what is the right hon. Gentleman doing to prevent the flooding of the home market and the complete disruption of the cotton textile industry?

My Department has spent a great deal of time doing everything it can to make certain that that should not happen. In our discussions with the Common Market countries, these considerations are very clearly at the forefront of our minds.

Has my right hon. Friend heard from the Textile Industry Support Campaign, which seems to be very edgy on this matter? It seems to think that the Government have sold the pass, when it would not appear from a recent answer that that has happened. Can my right hon. Friend give the Campaign any assurances on the matter?

The matter was dealt with by my hon. Friend the Member for Cirencester and Tewkesbury (Mr. Ridley) in his answer to the hon. Member for Portsmouth, West (Mr. Judd) on 20th March and in the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Oldham, East (Mr. Lamond) on 21st April. We certainly have not sold the pass, and have no intention of doing so.

Is the Minister aware that I have been battering my head against this problem for the past 15 years at least, I am sorry to say with very little success under either Government? Whether a Labour Government or a Conservative Government have been in power, the impression has been left in Lancashire that textiles are an expendable industry and that we have gone from bad to worse, until at last a full stop was put to the process by the restoration of quotas. Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that at a time when 55 per cent. of the British home market is taken by imports from under-developed and semi-developed countries, some of our European would-be partners in the Common Market are importing about 4 per cent. or 5 per cent. at most, and refuse to take any step, except to pass pious resolutions, to help those countries? This country, my county of Lancashire in particular, is completely fed up with the indifference of all Governments to this problem.

I am very well aware of the hon. Gentleman's interest in the pro lem, for at least 14 years. I am grateful to him for saying that the introduction of quotas was of benefit. I think he also appreciates that, as we heard in a debate not long ago, some textile imports—I think the figure is 50 per cent., and not 55 per cent., but I would not quarrel with him about this—are necessary if we are to discharge our responsibility to developing countries.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the present burden of imports is many times in excess of that in the Common Market countries? Will he please stand firm on the assurance he gave the House on 8th December that the interests of the industry would at least be maintained? The discussions taking place in Brussels relate to cotton textile imports. Will my right hon. Friend give similar assurances that he will give equal support in regard to man-made fibre imports, including polyster, which is coming into this country at an ever-increasing rate?

I am very well aware of the problems of polyester and other yarns, and I shall do all I can to protect my hon. Friend's interests in this regard.

As the industry in question is likely to be one of the first affected by the move of decision-making power from London to Brussels, will the Minister undertake to provide the very fullest information to the House and the industry on the progress of the negotiations, including the publication of documents submitted to him by members of the European Economic Community, so that all may know exactly where they stand at this juncture?

I shall try to keep the House informed at appropriate moments, but I could not publish every document as soon as it was received, or before it had been properly considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what consultations he has held with officials of the Bank of England in regard to the efficiency of joint stock company management; and if he will make a statement.

My Department will remain in touch with the Bank on this as on other matters of common interest. My hon. Friend will of course recall the initiatives announced by the CBI and the Governor on 15th March.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is there not a danger that if certain institutional shareholders or their nominess are given special access to company managements or to confidential information two classes of share holder will develop? Would it not be better to introduce some form of management audit by getting the non-executive directors to perform a more positive function?

My hon. Friend will of course realise that the work contemplated by the CBI specifically concerns non-executive directors. The two studies are therefore proceeding in parallel but in close sympathy, and they should produce the kind of information which should be useful in seeing how the future can best be organised.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now change the system of reporting trade figures by giving these on a quarterly instead of a monthly basis.

No, Sir. The monthly trade figures, though subject to irregular movements and special influences, are of value if properly used and interpreted.

Does my right hon. Friend recall a previous supplementary answer, when his right hon. Friend said that he had a certain sympathy with this point of view? Will he look at it again? Publication of these erratic monthly figures does great discredit to this country because certain people take unscrupulous advantage of the odd monthly changes.

Yes, Sir. I have some sympathy with my hon. Friend in this matter. The problem is that practically all the developed countries produce their figures monthly, as do international organisations such as the United Nations and the OECD. Thus, if we were to move to three-monthly figures, it would be open to almost everybody to speculate from other sources what our figures might be. This might well do more damage.

Recalling the Chancellor of the Exchequer's ludicrous and discredited accusations against the then Labour Government of fiddling the trade figures, will the right hon. Gentleman resist all attempts by his non. Friends to fiddle the trade figures on behalf of the Government as the trade balance inevitably declines towards the next General Election?

I do not think that observation needs any comment from me.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in view of his responsibility for tourism, what effect he expects the Fire Precautions Act to have upon small hotels; and what estimate he has made of the number of hotels which will be required to undertake work directly as a result of the implementation of the Act.

I cannot give an estimate. Questions about the requirements of the Fire Precautions Act are matters for my right hon. Friend, the Secretary of State for the Home Department. I am aware of the concern over the implementation of the Act and I have discussed this with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department. I understand that he has arranged to have further discussions with my hon. Friend and other hon. Members whose constituents are affected.

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for his help in this matter. Is not the fact that he cannot give me figures an indication that perhaps the Home Office rather hastily introduced this legislation without the fullest consultation with the Department of Trade and Industry and with the Treasury? Will he undertake to have further urgent consultations not only with the Home Office but also with the Treasury about the question of availability of loans to the people concerned?

I take careful note of what my hon. Friend says and will pursue discussions with my colleagues. On the question of loans, I saw a Press report that the British Hotel and Restaurants Association is making arrangements for a system of loans, at possibly favourable rates, to cover work on fire precautions. I hope that this comes to fruition.

Will the hon. Gentleman have discussions with his colleagues responsible for tourism and catering in Scotland?

Yes, Sir, and with the tourist boards themselves.

Is my hon. Friend aware that it would not be realistic, or necessary, to insist on the installation in existing small hotels and boarding houses of the same type of fire fighting apparatus and the same means of escape as are required in new, modern hotels? Will he urge his right hon. Friend to make it clear that the code is intended to be applied in a reasonable and commonsense way?

I am sure that it will be the wish of my right hon. Friend to apply the code in a reasonable and commonsense way. In any event, I am sure that my right hon. Friend understands the point which my hon. Friend has made.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many industrial development certificates were issued to industrialists in the Livingston new town area since it was granted special development area status.

None, but 1,800 jobs in manufacturing industry are expected to arise in the Livingston employment exchange area over the next four years from known industrial projects. Total unemployed is at present 570.

Is the hon. Gentleman satisfied that the incoming population in the new town is not increasing more than job provision? Can he say what sort of co-ordinating function his Department has in this matter?

I understand the hon. Gentleman's anxiety, but I think that it is ill-founded. We work in close conjunction with the Department of the Environment in this respect and it is far too early to suggest that more people will come in than can be catered for by Livingston. I am pleased to say that Livingston has succeeded in attracting a variety of manufacturing firms, many of them new to Scotland, and that it is the focal point of an extensive surrounding area.

Is there any evidence that any of the special development areas created last year have benefited disproportionately, as compared with other parts of development areas, from this status? If there is, will my lion. Friend publish it?

I have no such evidence.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he hopes to make a statement on future Government help for International Computers Limited.

I have nothing to add at present to the answer given to the hon. Member for Newcastle-under-Lyme (Mr. Golding) on 17th April, when my right hon. Friend the Minister for Industrial Development said that an announcement would be made as soon as is practicable.—[Vol. 835, c. 25.]

Why is the computer industry being kept waiting like this?

I do not believe that the computer industry is necessarily being kept waiting unduly. This is an extremely complex matter and one which merits the most careful consideration by the Government, which is what it is receiving.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects to announce his decision on the funding of an up-rated version of the RB211.

The Chairman of Lockheed raised this with me when I met him on 10th April. I am in discussion with Rolls-Royce (1971) about this question and have just received proposals from them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, despite the Prime Minister's changes in the Government's team, this problem goes on just the same, and that if we are to get a proper production run for this fine aircraft it is necessary for a full range of planes to be offered? Since Lockheed proposes that the plane should be built, what is the reason for the delay by the Government?

There is no delay at all. As the hon. Gentleman perhaps knows, it is Lockheed's hope to be able to announce its intention to proceed with a stretched version later this year. Lockheed would not say that there is any delay on the part of Rolls-Royce (1971) Ltd., or on the part of Her Majesty's Government. It would not be the case.

Does not the decision whether to go ahead depend largely on orders for the present TriStar? In relation to the BAB and the possibility of an order, since the intention seems to be that an order will be placed, is there not a case for its being placed soon? Does the BAB appreciate that point?

The BAB fully understands the exact problem which faces both it and the manufacturers and it is taking an exceedingly responsible view in relation to it, as it is in relation to the expenditure of public money.

Is not the present TriStar's success closely related to the ability of Lockheed to offer a stretched version?

I think that it is, generally speaking, regarded as a sign of a successful aircraft to be able to engender a family of aircraft. This I appreciate fully. But at the moment the need is to ensure that the present version is a highly successful commercial venture.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many applications he has received for natural gas to be used to fuel generating stations.

Approval was given, in 1967 and 1970, for two power stations—Hams Hall C and West Thurrock—to be converted to dual coal/gas firing. Apart from an old application, now in abeyance, to convert the oil-fired station at South Denes, there are no outstanding applications from the CEGB.

In considering any future application, will the hon. Gentleman be guided by the fact that it is an uneconomic use of natural gas, since there are heavy losses in transmission from electricity?

It is for the Central Electricity Generating Board to decide whether to apply for construction or conversion of power stations to use natural gas, and all the factors will be considered on their merits in any application.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in Europe natural gas is being used in vast quantities for power stations? If the Europeans can do it. why cannot this be done here?

The use of natural gas in Europe is well recognised. This is one of the factors which will be taken into account if the board makes the necessary application for conversion or construction.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he, or one of his Ministers, will pay an official visit to South Yorkshire and, particularly, those areas within that part of the county where male unemployment is at, near, or over the rate of 10 per cent.

My right hon. Friend the Minister for Industrial Development hopes to visit Leeds on 22nd May. Further visits to this and other assisted areas will follow as circumstances allow.

Leeds is not in South Yorkshire. Before he visits Leeds or any other part of Yorkshire, will the Minister remind himself that several thousand jobs have been lost since the Government announced their change of regional policy? Therefore, when he visits Yorkshire and other areas in similar difficulties, will he be prepared to explain to the people in those areas exactly when unemployment will be reduced and why the Government took so long to change their regional policies?

When my right hon. Friend visits Leeds, or any other part of Yorkshire, he will engage in the fullest possible discussions, as I have. What is clear is that Yorkshire stands to gain greatly from the Government's new regional policies.