I beg to move,

That the Committee on the Thames Barrier and Flood Prevention Bill have leave to visit and inspect the site of the proposed barrier provided that no evidence shall be taken in the course of such visit and that any party who has made an Appearance before the Committee be permitted to attend by their Counsel or Agent.

Hon. Members will be aware that, although it is the practice for Committees on Private Bills in another place to make visits, in this House the practice can be adopted only with the leave of the House. I must admit that I know of no procedure for such leave being applied for, although it is within my experience, certainly as a Chairman of a Committee on Private Bills, that visits of this sort could in certain circumstances have been of value to the Committees.

The Bill at present being considered by the Committe is vitally important to many of the inhabitants of London, and the cost of the scheme is estimated at £125 million. One of the duties of the Committee is to satisfy itself about the need for the scheme and the Chairman of the Committee, the hon. Member for Dorset, North (Mr. David James) has advised me that the Committee would be helped to carry out its duties by a formal visit to the site.

There are a number of petitioners against the Bill, and in hearing the submissions of the promoters and petitioners, the Committee acts in a semi-judicial capacity. In the interests of justice, it is therefore right that the parties affected by the Bill should, if they wish, be represented. If the House agrees to the Motion, I hope that other Committees will not make it a precedent for indiscriminate visits. Dangers could arise from the practice if it were indiscriminate, but in present circumstances I feel that these dangers are minimal.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will seek powers to make it an offence for a car to be advertised as capable of reaching speeds in excess of the statutory speed limit.

No, Sir.

Is the right hon. Gentleman unaware that this kind of advertisement is a direct invitation to break the law because people will try out their cars to see whether they will do the speeds of up to 120 m.p.h. which are claimed? What view would he take if I advertised in the newspapers a new type of blowlamp guaranteed to cut through any safe? That would be exactly the same thing.

With respect, that is not a very exact parallel. The purchaser of a motor car may want to know how close he is to the maximum speed of the car he is driving. There is also the question of exports in that many countries do not apply our speed limits.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will seek to modify Schedule 4 (Part VIII) of the Weights and Measures Act, 1963, so as to require jam and marmalade for diabetics to be sold in fixed quantities and to prohibit the sale of all jams, marmalade and honey in quantities of 12 ounces.

No, Sir. The specific gravity of diabetic jams and marmalades is different from that of standard jams. Therefore, if the standard range of quantities were required to be used, a new range of jars would be needed and that would increase costs.

Speciality jams have been sold for many years in 12-oz. jars and the demand for this quantity is increasing. I see no reason to frustrate this demand.

I am dazzled by science but not convinced by it. Will my hon. Friend give a more satisfactory answer to the last part of my Question? Is he aware that many people are deceived by jars which look very much like 1-lb. jars but in fact contain only 12 ozs.?

I am sorry to dazzle my hon. Friend in any way, though she has often dazzled me. I am sure she will understand that each jar must be clearly labelled as to contents and weight, so that I do not feel that deception is either possible or intended.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that metrication, which was the brain-child of the Secretary of State in his C.B.I. days and was very much encouraged by the Government, gives an opportunity, with the packaging changes that are being made, to introduce the sort of unit packaging which the hon. Lady the Member for Merton and Morden (Miss Fookes) requests? Does he agree that this would be an ideal time to discourage deliberately confusing packaging practices for the same competing goods and that metric measurement of volume and of weight is making it impossible for the housewife to carry out a meaningful value-for-money judgment?

It will always be difficult with the different specific gravities of weight between jams, but in considering all the possibilities of any future metrication proposals these difficulties will be borne very much in mind.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects to conclude the negotiations and agree with Rolls Royce Limited a figure for the payment for the nationalised assets and goodwill.

Rolls-Royce (1971) Ltd. and the Receiver have recently announced that they have been unable to agree a price by negotiation. In accordance with the sale agreement, therefore, the matter is being referred to an independent expert whose decision will be binding. I cannot at present forecast when a conclusion may be reached. The valuation process must be carried out with care, but I appreciate the urgency stressed by hon. Members.

In welcoming my hon. Friend to his new position as Minister for Aerospace, may I ask him what proportion of the price offered by the Government for the acquisition of the assets included goodwill and expenditure on research and development on the RB 211 engine? If the negotiations broke down, did they do so because it was felt that the Government had not offered a fair price?

I believe that the price agreed for the RB 211 was £1 and that it was accepted by both parties in recognition of all the circumstances of the time.

Have all the parties agreed that the expert's opinion shall be binding?

That is a provision of the contract.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry to what extent the investment programme of the British ball-bearing industry has been restricted by the incursion of Japanese competition in this field, according to information tendered to him.

No examples have been quoted to me of investment plans which have been inhibited by competition from Japan, but the industry has told me that it may have to limit investment in the future unless the rate of growth of imports from Japan is curtailed.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that is a grave answer which has serious implications for our ball-bearing industry, on which many other industries depend? Does he realise that imports of Japanese ball bearings have increased by 500 per cent. since 1967 and that they doubled last year? What steps does he propose to take to protect our ball-bearing industry and those employed in it?

As the hon. Gentleman, I think, knows, the Federation concerned has been to talk to the Department and has asked us to institute certain measures which lie within our power in this sphere. These require the assembly of a considerable amount of information. This is being assembled. Only after this information has been got together will it be possible to see whether the kind of measures envisaged can be taken. I have the matter under very serious and urgent consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what in formation he has received from industry concerning the piracy of design and catalogue numbers by Japanese manufacturers engaged in the ball and roller-bearing industry and exporting to the United Kingdom.

None, Sir.

I will give the right hon. Gentleman the information. Is he aware that the importation of ball bearings into America has resulted in the complete shutdown of American domestic production and that that is likely to happen here? Is he aware that I hold in my hand a component part of a motor car which is stamped with the country of origin, Japan, with the manufacturer's name and with the catalogue number by which it is manufactured in Britain? Is he aware that this sort of unbridled and unfair competition is resulting in problems affecting a vital part of British engineering and that unless something is done quickly——

Order. I have every sympathy with the hon. Gentleman, but I remind him that this is Question time.

I will answer the hon. Gentleman's implied question. He asked whether I had certain information. I do not have information of the kind he refers to. On the other hand, the industry has its own rights in the matter and can and should raise with the courts any action which it considers to be a breach of its copyrights or patents. Whether catalogue numbers constitute a protection of industrial property is matter for the courts to decide.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that this is bound to lead to large-scale unemployment in the industry, which is being strangled by this kind of competition?

Again answering the hon. Gentleman's implied question, I assure him, as I assured his hon. Friend the Member for Stoke-on-Trent, South (Mr. Ashley) on the last Question, that I have the matter under very urgent consideration. At the same time, it is for the industry concerned to take in the courts any action it considers to be necessary.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry which of the powers currently exercisable by Her Majesty's Government to inhibit the import of foreign ball bearings will cease to be so exercisable, or to be exercisable only in accordance with the law of the European Communities, after 1st January, 1973.

Broadly speaking, we shall retain our present powers during the transitional period, but will exercise them only in conformity with our Community obligations.

Perhaps I may first point out, Mr. Speaker, that Question No. 1 for Written Answer, which deals with import restrictions on ball bearings made outside EEC and EFTA countries, was supposed to be for Oral Answer, and was intended to be the pair to Question No. 12.

Is the Secretary of State seriously saying that he will be able to retain his present powers? Does he have that in writing? If so, can he give the reference to it in the Agreements with the European Community?

The hon. Member can remain secure in the belief that in the Community arrangements existing provisions which members had at the time when Community requirements came into force have been preserved in this field, and this will be our case, too.

Can the Minister give a definite assurance that after the transitional period he and the Government will be enabled, as now, to fix quotas and import duties irrespective of any discussion with or reference to the E.E.C. whenever he or his Government wish so to do?

No. I am sure that the hon. Gentleman well realises from his very intensive attendance at the debates taking place on the matter that those arrangements certainly do not exist.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what further facts he has received from the United Kingdom ball-bearing industry about the effects of Japanese competition; and if he will make a statement.

On 18th January a deputation from the ball and roller bearing industry asked the Government to approach the Japanese Government with a view to securing a voluntary limitation of growth of sales of Japanese bearings in this country. The case put by the industry, together with the further confidential information which manufacturers provided at the Department's request, is under consideration, and I hope shortly to let the industry know the Government's views.

I am grateful for the information which the right hon. Gentleman supplied, but he must be desperately concerned that the type of bearing which my hon. Friend the Member for Ham- mersmith, North (Mr. Tomney) held up a moment or two ago is entering the country at about 50 per cent, of the price of the equivalent bearing supplied by British manufacturers. Does not the Minister realise that we are faced with redundancies here on a four-figure scale, and that it is high time that the Government stopped considering and took action?

As the hon. Member knows full well, taking some action in cases like this involves the assembly of a very great deal of specific information. The industry has been helpful in putting forward a lot of information to enable the Government to take steps. The hon. Member need have no fear that if the information confirms the position he outlines, action will be taken.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent consultations he has had with the Confederation of British Industry regarding imports of Japqanese ball bearings; and what action he is taking in consequence.

The CBI is aware of the discussions which have taken place between the Department and representatives of The Ball and Roller Bearing Manufacturers' Association.

The CBI may be aware, but I wonder whether the Minister is aware of the anxieties of the trade unions in the matter? Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a first-class firm in Luton put off nearly 900 men last year and is faced with further unemployment in the coming year if Japanese competition goes on? The right hon. Gentleman says that he is collecting information, but how much information does he need before he takes action?

As the hon. Member knows, in order to take action either in respect of anti-dumping or under the trade agreement with Japan we have to be satisfied, first, that there is manifest damage expected to the industry of the country and, secondly, that there is an effective dumping procedure in force. In so far as anti-dumping procedures are required, these are very complex things to prove, but I am seeking to acquire the necessary information. which is not, I assure the hon. Gentleman, readily or easily forthcoming.

The case has been made out for the ball-bearing industry, but I am sure that my right hon. Friend is very well aware of the representations made by the textile industry over a much longer period.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what criteria he has laid down for certificates of fitness for production platforms under the Mineral Working (Offshore Installations) Act, 1971; and what authority has been appointed to see that they are met.

Criteria will be included in regulations at present being discussed with those who may be affected. Certificates will be issued by me or by authorities yet to be appointed under the regulations.

I wish my hon. Friend every success in his exacting new responsibilities.

Here come the brewers.

Is my hon. Friend aware that lack of basic design criteria covering fatigue and other factors is inhibiting British competition in offshore platform construction and that "best-known practices" are no substitute for proper criteria when three different oil companies are basing designs on widely divergent forecasts of wave characteristics in the same area of the North Sea?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend for his good wishes.

My hon. Friend must bear in mind that lengthy consultations are going on. The draft regulations have been fully discussed and are subject to full discussion with those interested. I assure my hon. Friend that the points he made are being taken fully into account.

While echoing the good wishes of the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, West (Mr. Sutcliffe) to the new Minister, may I ask him for an assurance that any recommendations from his Department will be speeded so that there is no delay for British firms wishing to compete in the construction of these rigs, the building of which is extremely important to some areas of the country and particularly to Scotland?

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for his opening remarks.

I assure him that this matter is proceeding as fast as possible and that full consultation is going on. Nobody should be inhibited at this stage from proceeding with design and other work.

I, too, wish the hon. Gentleman well in his new office.

Is he satisfied that the regulations will be adequate to cover conditions in the Celtic Sea, where climatic conditions can be unprecedented in offshore work?

This is one of the factors which is being taken fully into account, and full environmental conditions are under consideration.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what further representations he has received to date about the exclusion of Edinburgh from the Scottish Development Area; and what replies he has sent.

None, recently, to my Department on this specific subject. As to the reasons for leaving Edinburgh with intermediate area status, I would refer the hon. Member to the letter sent to him on 11th April by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Industrial Development.

Is the Minister aware that trade unionists, industrialists, and all shades of opinion in Edinburgh bitterly resent the Government's latest decision on the matter? How much longer has male unemployment in Edinburgh to rise faster than that in the rest of Scotland before the Government are prepared to stop discriminating against Edinburgh-based industry?

The hon. Member knows very well the arguments against the diluting of assistance given to development areas, but I hope that he realises that in the Budget and in the subsequent White Paper very substantial measures were announced which will be of direct assistance to intermediate areas such as his own.

Will my right hon. Friend note that this Question, like so many other Questions, demonstrates the extent to which all these various very complicated grades of development preference seem to be far more effective in stirring up animosity in the areas that do not have them than they are in giving satisfaction in those that do, and will he draw the moral from that state of affairs?

Whatever moral one might draw, one would still be left with the recognition that there are very serious problems to be tackled, and we intend to tackle them.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if, in view of the information supplied to him by the hon. Member for Wands worth, Putney, he will make a further statement on the States that have banned supersonic flying over their territory, and indicate what countries have recently enacted bans, and what countries have declared their intention to introduce such a ban.

A number of countries permit controlled supersonic military flying in their airspace. Only Switzerland has introduced legislation to prohibit overland supersonic flying. Each country will decide for itself the controls it wishes to apply to civil overland routes. A few countries have indicated an intention to regulate supersonic over flying, but I cannot speculate on the form these controls will take.

Is it not the case that the possibility of the commercial success of this aircraft is increasingly remote as more and more countries—and Canada is one—take the view that the aircraft cannot be allowed to fly over their territory? There is no possibility of this project being a commercial success. Will the Minister try to persuade the British Aircraft Corporation to start building some useful subsonic aircraft and to abandon the delusions of supersonic grandeur which have meant spending £1 million a day? If the Minister is to add to that expenditure a research subsidy, a development subsidy—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—a production subsidy, and after that—[HON. MEMBERS: "Too long."]—an operating subsidy as well——

Order. The hon. Member is going on too long.

I must say to the hon. Gentleman that his continually repeating that Concorde cannot be a commercial success makes it no truer now than when he first said it.

Will my hon. Friend consider holding an international conference to work out supersonic air lanes for this aircraft?

This is a matter for individual Governments. A number of them are looking at it, and a number of others have made recommendations with which my hon. Friend is familiar. It will be right for the British Government to watch the train of events in this field.

I should like to add my congratulations to those already offered to the hon. Member on his present position. I am sure that it must be very worrying for the Government that so many of these things should be in a state of complete indecision when the hope is that firm orders for Concorde will be placed very soon. Can the Minister say, quite apart from supersonic flights over territories, what discusions there have been with, for example, the United States Government about landing rights at airports in the United States? This is another extremely important matter that we should like to see settled.

The question of landing rights is a matter for the individual airlines, but it is important to say that since the Concorde project was started a very large number of hurdles have had to be overcome, and the vast majority of them have been overcome. In a very sophisticated project of this kind it must be recognised that there are bound to be a number of problems outstanding, but the Government remain confident that these will be overcome in order to see that airlines buy the project on a suitable scale.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps he proposes to take to implement the recommendations of the Marshall Report concerning British Aircraft Corporation and Hawker-Siddeley.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now make a statement about the Marshall Report.

I have nothing to add to the answer given by my right hon. Friend on 1st March which confirmed that he would consider making a statement when he had received and considered the report.—[Vol. 832, c. 134.]

I, too, congratulate ray hon. Friend on assuming his present position, and wish him every success in it. As there are six or seven places which are inordinately dependent on BAC or Hawker-Siddeley for future employment, will my hon. Friend as soon as possible come to a decision either to accept or to reject the recommendations made by the Marshall Committee, because many people are in doubt about the future of the aircraft industry in many places?

I am aware of the diversity of the aircraft industry. I am delighted already to have visited Bristol since my appointment. I certainly realise the importance of this report. We shall treat it with the urgency it deserves.

I emphasise again the urgency of this matter because there is so much uncertainty in the industry and elsewhere. Will the Minister undertake to publish the Marshall Report, or at least so much of it as is necessary, to enable the House to judge the merits or otherwise of the Government's decisions?

We have undertaken to make a statement about the Marshall Report, but it is an internal report and we have made it clear that it was never intended for publication.

If the report suggests that Hawker-Siddeley and BAC should be merged, will my hon. Friend give an assurance that rather than set up a Rolls-Royce-type of monopolistic monolith, he will urge British manufacturers to collaborate with European manufacturers rather than to combine?

I do not believe that there is a danger of a monoply in the aero-space industries, but certainly we are very aware of and would welcome any developments beyond the national boundary.

Precisely why should it not be published?

The hon. Member is familiar with the very large amount of research and consultation work within Government Departments which is not published and which it is a matter for Governments to decide whether to publish.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of increased industrial activities in regional development areas, following the 100 per cent. free depreciation facilities announced in the Budget on 21st March, 1972.

While no precise estimate is possible, we expect the extension of free depreciation countrywide to stimulate demand for plant and machinery supplied by firms in all parts of the country, including the development areas.

When does my right hon. Friend expect to see some signs of resuscitation of orders in the capital goods industries, as, for example, in the Midlands, where the Budget appears under this head to have made no impact at all?

My hon. Friend should not expect to see the effects of the Budget already. But it will be clear to him that the package of measures contained in the Budget and the White Paper will be a very substantial stimulus.

Does not the Minister realise that, as in 1969 two and a half times as much new industrial space was approved in Wales as was approved in 1971, we need an absolutely massive improvement before the country can be satisfied? If he considers that the future is so promising, will he explain why the Government did not introduce these measures earlier and before, through their economic ineptitude, they threw an extra half a million people on the dole queues?

I believe that people who take a more unbiased approach to these problems will recognise that the Government are having to tackle difficulties which have their roots spread over many years, and that the measures contained in my right hon. Friend's Budget amounted, perhaps, to the most substantial attempt ever made to solve problems of the development regions.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will consider setting up a Government office in Newcastle for the new Minister for Development in view of the fact that the other main development areas, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland already have offices in being for their respective areas.

The Department's offices in Newcastle and the other development areas in Great Britain are responsible to me and I intend that they shall all have substantial delegated powers.

Is the Minister aware that we are not asking about the responsibility of the departments in the various development areas to him but about his responsibility to them? If development area policy is to mean anything in reducing the high unemployment figures, the Minister would do better to tackle that job sited on the spot. For the reasons I stated in the Question, Newcastle is the obvious centre from which this Ministry should operate.

I hope to spend a good deal of my time in the regions. Obviously, I have a responsibility for all the regions, but the hon. Gentleman may rest assured that I shall certainly not overlook the North East.

As the Conservative Government before 1964 appointed Lord Hailsham as Minister with special responsibilities for the North East, and the previous Labour Government had a Minister with responsibility for the North East, will the right hon. Gentleman look again at this point? Special needs exist there which would best be met by arrangements more comparable with those which have operated in respect of Scotland and Wales.

Obviously the appointment of Ministers is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister. I believe that the integrated approach upon which we are embarked is the most promising means of assisting the regions.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will make a statement about which companies will receive increased financial assistance in the machine tool industry, as a result of the Budget proposals.

All firms are eligible to take advantage of the recently announced £9 million-£10 million scheme for additional and accelerated public sector orders.

Is the Minister aware that most firms in the machine tool industry have employees who have very little confidence and very poor morale at present, particularly at Alfred Herbert's at Coventry? Can he give any indication of how much individual firms may expect to receive, and particularly Alfred Herbert's? Many of my constituents feel that it will be a case of too little too late.

The proportion of the £9 million-£10 million that is secured by any individual firm will depend on that firm. But the hon. Gentleman will have pointed out to his constituents, I am sure, the effects that free depreciation is likely to have in due course on the machine tool industry.

Is the Minister aware that the Churchill Machine Tool Company in Greater Manchester remains under sentence of death, that redundancies have already begun to take place there, and that if further redundancies occur an already grave employment position in Greater Manchester will further deteriorate? What hopes are there for saving Churchill's?

I do not wish to comment upon the position of the firm which the hon. Gentleman mentions, but I draw his attention also to the substantial steps which the Government have taken to assist the machine tool industry.

asked the Secretary of state for Trade and Industry what are the latest conveniently available figures of output for the machine-tool industry.

Provisional delivery figures for the fourth quarter and year 1971 have been published in Business Monitor P 64, a copy of which is in the Library. This shows that the current value of deliveries declined by 5 per cent. between 1970 and 1971.

Is there any evidence as yet that the Government's Budget measures are working?

Obviously it would be too soon to produce evidence of that kind. In addition to the extra orders that have come from the public sector, there has been free depreciation, which is of special importance for machine tools, and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has announced that in the context of selective assistance priority study is being given to machine tools.

In view of the Minister's remarks about free depreciation, may I ask whether he is satisfied that this is not an opaque aid to the industry which will fall under the strictures of the EEC Commission? In any case, in view of the undesirability of constant chopping and changing in aid measures of this kind, can he give any indication of how long this measure is likely to survive?

We are satisfied that all these measures are consistent with the obligations that we shall assume as members of the Community. The hon. Gentleman's second question is clearly one for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he is now in a position to make a statement on the Government's policy for the steel industry, and to what extent this will mean the closing of existing steel works and redundancies in the industry's and to what extent the Government's proposals are based on the prospects of Great Britain's entry into the Common Market.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now announce the details of his plans regarding the financial investment and capacity requirements of the British Steel Corporation up to 1980; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now publish the long-term development plans for the British Steel Corporation; and if he will make a statement.

I have nothing to add to the answer given to my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Edward Taylor) on 10th April.—[Vol. 834, c. 843–45.]

That is a very disappointing reply. Will the Minister give a definite assurance that, come what may, under whatever conditions we may enter the Common Market, he and the Government will be able and entitled to take whatever action they may desire, without reference to the EEC, on matters relating to prices, redundancies, the price of steel and all matters pertaining to the steel industry, without question, let or hindrance from the EEC countries? Will the Minister give a definite pledge on these matters?

As the hon. Gentleman very well knows, on the question of prices I cannot and will not give him that undertaking, because the principles regarding prices are embodied in the ECSC Treaty. Redundancies are a matter for the Corporation and not for me.

The right hon Gentleman cannot give any promises at all.

Has the Secretary of State's attention been drawn to the proposal of the British Steel Corporation to close the former Stewarts and Lloyds tube works in Newport, Monmouthshire? Instead of allowing that, would he try to ensure investment at these works in line with their profitability over many years and the fine product which has always been made there? Will he also bear in mind the heavy unemployment in Newport at present?

I am naturally very concerned with the questions to which the hon. Gentleman refers. I know that the hon. Gentleman realises that questions of closure, redundancies and further investment are primarily for the Corporation. It is evident that I take a very great interest in these matters, particularly from the point of view of regional policy——

The right hon. Gentleman can make no promises.

—and from the point of view of the Government's investment interests in this massive industry——

And the EEC.

—but this is primarily a matter for the Corporation.

My right hon. Friend will realise that my Question deals specifically with the long-term development plans which we were promised would be announced last year. Why has there been this long delay? Can he announce an early date when these plans will be published, because their absence is causing a great deal of concern to plant manufacturers?

I am as concerned as is my hon. Friend with the urgency of these problems, The fact that publication has been later than I expected is due entirely to the complex nature of the assessments which have demanded far deeper and more careful study than had ever previously been made. I should like to reassure my hon. Friend in one respect. The present level of investment in this industry is very high. Irrespective of the considerations of long-term strategic investment, present investment in the steel industry is at an historically high level. Therefore, in terms of the immediate future of the industry, nothing is being neglected which could possibly be proceeded with.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that last night I attended a mass meeting in Stoke-on-Trent at which the possible closure of the Shelton Steel Works was discussed? There is growing concern in North Staffordshire, because, if this steelworks closed, it would turn North Staffordshire into a distressed area. Will the right hon. Gentleman take account of this very grave state of affairs and accept my assurance that, if this works is closed, what has happened on Upper Clyde will be as nothing to what the moderate men of North Staffordshire will be doing?

I am as anxious as is the hon. Gentleman to ensure that the future of the industry is planned with due regard to the existing interests of people employed in it and to the major interests of customers, both at home and abroad. All this is important in the determination of the best long-term plan. This occasions the very deepest consideration, particularly in circumstances in which the steel market in current terms, and even in outlook, is still looking very uncertain.

When will my right hon. Friend be able to tell us how many price basing points for steel the EEC will permit us to have——

He can make no promises.

—in the event of our joining the Community? Is my right hon. Friend aware that Scotland was very glad to have his assurance recently that Hunterston is still an open question and we hope that there will still be a decision on this——

He can promise nothing.

Detecting the purport of my hon. Friend's question as best I may through the sedentary interjections of the hon. Member for West Ham, North (Mr. Arthur Lewis), I must tell my hon. Friend that the question of basing points for pricing purposes by the Corporation is one in which the Corporation is deeply engaged. I hope that these negotiations will soon be completed and that the Corporation will make the necessary announcement.

Would it not be nearer the truth for the right hon. Gentleman to admit that he held back the steel investment plan with a view, first, to cutting it and then, while he was reviewing it, realised the need for expansion? Is it not true that the Government have not given a clear lead to the competitive steel industry? Although investment is at a high level, is there not a serious need for plant manufacturers and for the industry as a whole to know what the level of investment is to be and also, to stress a point which has been raised more than once this afternoon, to know the impending level of redundancies?

Yes, but the right hon. Gentleman should recall that in 1971–72 the out-turn of investment will be about £258 million, which is nearly double the figure for the preceding year, which figure was the outcome of investment decisions taken previously. The right hon. Gentleman cannot in reason make a charge that the Government intended to restrain the level of investment. What the Government were concerned to do was to move ahead with all investment they humanly could without prejudicing the Corporation's long-term interests.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made on the effect of steel-consuming industries in Scotland of the pricing policy which will be required to be introduced to conform to the rules of the European Coal and Steel Community.

The Corporation and the independent steel producers are examining the effect as part of their detailed study to see where to place their basing points. Government Departments are being kept in touch with the progress of this study.

Can my hon. Friend confirm that it will no longer be possible to continue a uniform price for steel in Great Britain? When does he think Scottish industrialists will have some indication whether the prices relative to England will move up or down?

The pricing policy is, as my hon. Friend knows, governed by the regulations and there will not be uniformity throughout. However, there may well be a number of basing points, and it may be, as there can be, one in Scotland which could be advantageous to Scotland. It is the intention of the Steel Corporation to minimise disturbance in the traditional price pattern.

Will the hon. Gentleman given an assurance that whatever basing points are chosen, pricing will not be damaging to the shipbuilding industry?

As I said, it is the Corporation's intention to minimise disturbance to the traditional pricing pattern. It will make an announcement fairly soon.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the percentage of natural gas lost during 1971 in the transmission systems of the gas industry; and what was the overall percentage loss in 1971 compared with 1961, before the advent of natural gas.

This is a matter within the responsibility of the gas industry, and I have asked the Chairman of the Gas Council to write to the hon. Member.

Is the Minister aware that that is a very superficial and unsatisfactory answer, that natural gas is now leaking into electricity supply substations, that there have been a number of explosions, that there has been loss of life, and that much of this is due to the unsatisfactory condition of many of the old gas networks which should never have been used in this situation? It is not good enough for the hon. Gentleman to say that the Chairman of the Council can write to me. I can always write to the Chairman of the Council at any time.

I am well aware of the problems to which the hon. Gentleman refers, but the Gas Council, which has the responsibility for this matter, has many safety regulations, of which the hon. Gentleman is aware. The enforcement of those safety regulations is good, and this is a matter on which the hon. Gentleman should refer to the Gas Council. I am satisfied that the regulations as they are now prepared by the Gas Council comply with requirements that are reasonable.

May I correct my hon. Friend? The House has, and always has had, absolute responsibility for safety in natural and town gas matters—in fact, for the whole of the carbonisation industry. As these mains cross my constituency in considerable volume, will not my hon. Friend re-apply himself to this matter, as I am conscious of the needs for my own and my constituents' safety?

My hon. Friend is of course correct—the responsibility lies where he said. That responsibility is discharged to the extent that the regulations of the Gas Council are properly applied and effective. I will, as my right hon. Friend has always done, give full weight to what my hon. Friend said.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he is yet able to announce the level of governmental aid to the computer industry.

The recommendations of the Select Committee on Science and Technology about aid to the computer industry are still under consideration. I shall make an announcement as soon as is practicable.

Is the Minister aware that only last week another 550 redundancies were declared in the computer industry in North Staffordshire and that the industry is waiting for a rapid implementation of the recommendations of the Select Committee on Science and Technology which will protect the British computer industry in a situation in which computer industries are protected worldwide?

The Government have already taken action on certain of the Select Committee's recommendations and announcements have been made about purchasing softwear and the centralisation of computer procurement. Very far-reaching proposals were made which require detailed consideration and discussion with the computer industry. I assure the hon. Gentleman that I will make an announcement as soon as is consistent with getting the answer right.

Will the right hon. Gentleman consult the Secretary of State for Social Services with a view to increasing the use of computers in the hospital service and in other sections of the National Health Service, in an attempt to increase the demand for computers? This has proved greatly successful in a number of regional hospital boards and has brought about a substantial saving of manpower, which is very short in the National Health Service.

I will certainly take note of that point.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a further statement on the progress of his discussions with the Confederation of British Industry regarding the renewal of their price restraint scheme; and the effects of such renewal on the finances of the nationalised industries.

On the first part of the Question I have nothing to add to what my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister said on 28th March; on the second part of the Question I have nothing to add to what I told my hon. Friend on 20th March.—[Vol. 834, c. 232–3; Vol. 833, c. 1064.]

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply. Is it not by now evident that a further period of price restraint imposed upon the nationalised industries could well place them in a condition of chronic dependence on taxpayers' subsidies to pay their wages bills? Would not this, far from contributing to a dampening down of inflation, chronically and vastly accelerate the rate of inflation?

These are the vexing questions with which we are faced in trying to restrain the movements of inflation—an effort to which, as I know, all hon. Members on both sides are strongly Committed. The problem of the financial situation of the nationalised industries is clearly one of real concern to me. My hon. Friend will agree that control of the inflationary tendency is still the most critical question with which the country is faced.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the relationship of the proposed Industrial Development Board with companies undertaking development projects in connection with North Sea oil.

Companies undertaking such projects will fall within the field of interest of the Industrial Development Board.

Could the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that one of the delegated powers that he will give to the region might be in respect of the petrol division itself? Can we look for a transfer of the petrol division of his Ministry to Scotland in view of the vast North Sea oil potential there?

The petroleum division is responsible for the licensing arrangements for getting petroleum and for all other matters relating to fuel and power which are outside the rôle of the Industrial Development Executive for which I have responsibility.

Has the right hon. Gentleman had a chance to meet his new colleague, Lord Polwarth, the Minister of State, Scottish Office, and ascertain his views on the agencies which might be set up in Scotland in order to make use of the revenues from North Sea oil? If not, will he do so?

I intend to work in the closest consultation with Scottish Ministers.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if it is still the Government's intention to legislate to implement the main recommendations of the Crowther Report on Consumer Credit.

I have already accepted the need for major reform of the law relating to consumer credit, and preparations for this are in hand. I will make a statement of general intent as soon as I can.

While that reply is very welcome, may I ask my right hon. Friend to draw to the attention of his right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer that one of the first principles of the Crowther Report was that all credit transactions should be treated on the same basis, and further draw to his attention the outrageous proposal in this year's Finance Bill that interest applicable to hire-purchase transactions with the ordinary public will not be exempt, while large amounts of interest on money borrowed for Stock Exchange speculation will be exempt?

I am sure that my right hon. Friend the Chancellor will take note of that comment, having regard, however, to the difficult context in which the decision had to be taken.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that by a legal device companies such as Alpha Home Improvements Limited are denying housewives the protection that was intended under the Hire-Purchase Acts. Does he not realise that the need for action is now urgent, as the housewife is being treated very badly by unscrupulous doorstep spivs?

Yes, I have had this drawn to my attention. One of the purposes that the Crowther Report sought to serve was to ensure that all such arrangements as the hon. Gentleman mentioned should be subject to the same degree of control as are hire-purchase arrangements, in the sense that there must be a period during which revocation is open to the customer.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of increased industrial activity in the Midlands arising from his Budget proposals.

The proposals announced on 22nd March are part of a coherent programme for the modernisation and expansion of British industry in all parts of the country. The Midlands will also benefit substantially through the extension of free depreciation on plant and machinery and the increased initial allowance for industrial buildings.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware—apart from that platitudinous reply, which told me nothing—that the West Midlands is gradually becoming an area of vast industrial dereliction with an unemployment rate higher than the national average? Is he aware that within Wolverhampton 300 young people, school leavers, are unable to get jobs, and there are several hundreds more coming out of school in July? What does he intend to do? When does he reckon that these alleged benefits will be felt in the West Midlands?

The hon. Lady asks me a question which clearly is capable of no direct reply since there could not be evidence as yet of the measures taken in the Budget. However, she may be interested to know that there are continuing signs of recovery amongst manufacturers of consumer goods in the West Midlands. The number of IDC applications received during March in the West Midlands for projects in excess of 5,000 square feet was 57, the highest for over a year, and 47 of those were for areas over 10,000 square feet—an exceptionally high proportion.

Have those applications been granted?

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he is aware that the import of polyester yarn from Japanese sources has grown from 2 per cent. of the United Kingdom market in 1970 to 20 per cent. in January, 1972; and if he will take action to safeguard British interests.

The principal British producers have made representations to me about these imports, which I am considering.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that brief but courteous reply. May I urge him to consider the serious consequence of allowing the present situation to continue for a minute longer than necessary? May I also ask him, in view of the fact that his officials are currently negotiating technical details with the Commission officials in Brussels, whether he will impress upon his officials in these negotiations the need to place British interests in the forefront of their policy ambitions and not to sacrifice a major section of British industry as previous Administrations have done in respect of Lancashire?

I am sure that my hon. Friend realises that my officials always have the interests of Britain primarily in their minds.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what action he proposes in relation to the post- Apollo programme to preserve United Kingdom supremacy in all large structures projects and to ensure United Kingdom participation in the European Space Club. European Launcher Development Organisation and European Space Research Organisation post-Apollo programmes in the future.

The Government have decided to take a full part, along with other European nations, in further exploratory work designed to facilitate evaluation by the European Space Conference of its response to the United States offer of participation in the post-Apollo programme. The contribution of the Government to this further work is estimated at £240,000. Much of this money will be spent with British companies. I am not able to comment as to the likely outcome of these researches until they have been completed.

While appreciating the hon. Gentleman's reply, may I ask him whether he is not aware of the concern of the British aerospace industry for the need to increase collaboration with the United States on this aspect in order to reduce fragmentation and launcher costs? Will he ensure that if we enter the EEC the United Kingdom will give a continued initiative in this matter?

In reply to both questions, I am sure that the announcement will be welcomed by industry.

Will my hon. Friend bear in mind that there is a Report from the Select Committee on Science and Technology arising from the work of a Committee chaired by the hon. Member for Bristol, Central (Mr. Palmer) which has some important recommendations to make about British participation in the post-Apollo programme? May we be assured, in addition to what my hon. Friend said today, that the full report of the Committee will be urgently considered and reported upon by the Government as soon as possible?

We are aware of the work that was done, and I am looking at the report. I will take an early opportunity to announce any conclusions that I may reach.

While congratulating the hon. Gentleman on the reply that he has given about the post-Apollo programme, which was one of the recommendations of the Select Committee, may I ask him to say whether the Government are prepared to accept the main recommendation of the Select Committee, namely that a British space agency should be created?

I cannot answer that question, but it is a very important part of the matter that I am considering.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether the £240,000 which he has announced today will allow a decision to be reached in time to meet the deadline by which the European countries, including the United Kingdom, have to decide whether to respond to the bigger programme, running into £8 million a year, involved in full participation in the post-Apollo programme?

The present objective of the European Space Conference is to reach a decision on European participation in the shuttle programme in July and to take at the same time a decision in principle on participation in the tug or orbital systems which form part of the programme. This is as fast as we can go.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many firemen are employed by the British Airports Authority.

This is a matter for the British Airports Authority.

Is the Minister aware that there is a proposed reduction in fire-fighting staff at airports arising from the introduction of new foam-producing fire fighting equipment? Apart from the concern that there must always be at any such news of a reduction in fire-fighting staff, will the hon. Gentleman bear in mind that this depletes the number of personnel who might be available for rescue work? Will he look at this matter more deeply, in the public interest?

The question of safety is one for the Civil Aviation Authority and I have no doubt that the Authority will be bear this matter very much in mind.

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he is now in a position to state what precise agreements have been or will be made with the trade unions concerned as a precondition of Government support for Govan Shipbuilders Limited; which restrictive practices are to cease; whether all collective agreements on pay and conditions will be legally enforceable; what trial period is allowed during which effect must be given to any such agreements; and if he will make a statement.

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a further statement about the progress of his negotiations with the Marathon Manufacturing Company regarding the provision of financial assistance for the re-equipment of the Clydebank Yard, and outline the methods to be used to monitor the expenditure of such assistance on the purposes for which it may be granted.

TO ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now make a further statement on the position of Govan Shipbuilders Limited.

TO ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a further statement regarding the shipbuilding industry on the Upper Clyde

TO ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now make a statement on the application of the Marathon Manufacturing Company for financial assistance at Clydebank.

With your permission, Mr. Speaker, and that of the House, I should like to answer Questions Nos. 36, 50, 54, 57 and 58.

Govan Shipbuilders Ltd. and the Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions have reached an agreement on working practices which is now being considered by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment.

A further £1 million is being made available to the liquidator for working capital, pending the takeover by Govan Shipbuilders Ltd.

Negotiations have been concluded also between J. & C. Harrison Ltd., Govan Shipbuilders Ltd., the U.C.S. liquidator and my Department to enable work to start on two 26,000 tons deadweight bulk carriers at the Scotstoun yard. The trade unions concerned have promised their full co-operation in the timely construction and delivery of the ships. Details of the financial commitments entered into are being published in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

I have invited Mr. Harbin of Marathon to come to London for further discussions about the possible acquisition by the company of the Clydebank Yard, and he hopes to come this week.

Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that the promises to abandon unjustifiable restrictive practices go far enough? Further, to what extent would the provision of £35 million of taxpayers' money, largely on social rather than commercial grounds, be justified if these promises were not kept?

As my hon. and gallant Friend knows, considerable importance has been attached by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State to the matter to which he refers. The agreements now reached between Govan Shipbuilders Limited and the unions are, therefore, being studied by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Employment to ensure that they are acceptable to the Government.

With reference to the current discussions, is it not a fact that there is no precedent for assistance to a single firm under the Local Employment Acts on the scale which has been talked about? If that be so, will my right hon. Friend give particular attention to ensuring that proper procedures are followed for the monitoring of sums provided to ensure that they are used for the purposes for which they are allocated?

Any assistance which is made available to the Marathon company will be under the general powers available to my Department, according to the criteria which would apply to any company. Under the Local Employment Acts, there is a monitoring procedure, and this will certainly be followed.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that in the discussions with the Marathon company an invitation will be extended to Mr. Dannie McGarvey, of the boilermarkers'union, who has played such an important part in inducing this firm to come to the United Kingdom?

My right hon. Friend has made clear that he applauds the part which was played by the gentleman to whom the hon. Member refers in visiting a number of companies in Texas which were in contact with his Department.

Will my right hon. Friend take it that the news of the two new orders will be greatly welcomed on Clydeside, and that most Glasgow Members greatly appreciate in any event the splendid and energetic work which he and his colleagues have done to bring the matter at least to this stage? Is my right hon. Friend hopeful that the Marathon deal will come off?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for what he says. I am anxious to try to reach an agreement with the Marathon company if one is possible.

As regards the Marathon company, is the right hon. Gentleman aware that a decision was expected some weeks ago and that the delay in coming to a conclusion has given rise to some anxiety? May we be told that the discussions on which he is now entering will be the final discussions, and that we can expect a decision—a favourable decision very soon?

The hon. Gentleman is wrong about that. The proposals have only recently been put to the Government, and Mr. Harbin has made clear that he at least considers that there has been no untoward delay.

I make no comment about the amount of money which is going to Clydeside, but may I have an assurance that we shall have the same treatment on Tyneside, where we have had much less restrictive practices and so forth? Further, will my right hon. Friend take it that, if the amount of money which is going to Scotland is set against the £50 million which is, apparently, all that shipbuilders in other areas are to receive, I can only conclude that we are not getting a fair proportion?

It is too soon for me to comment in detail on my hon. Friend's question——

I want my hon. Friend to comment.

—but I shall certainly take note of her view.

Will the Minister remember that the whole idea on Clydeside is to keep the four yards in existence, and will he bend his mind to that full endeavour?

I have already told the hon. Gentleman of the action which we are taking in relation to the Marathon company.

(by Private Notice) asked the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs whether his attention has been drawn to the events which occurred in the British ship "Invita" at Calais harbouron Sunday, 16th April, whether he intends to raise with the French Government the unprovoked action of French police in assaulting British citizens and destroying their property, and whether he will make a statement.

On the 14th April the French Embassy in London informed the organisers of the expedition that their group would not be allowed to land at Calais.