asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in the light of the latest trade figures, what estimate he has made of the prospects for improving the balance of the United Kingdom's trade with Japan; and of increasing the total trade between the two countries in a substantial way.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement about the latest trends in British trade with Japan.

In my discussions with Japanese Ministers I have emphasised my concern to achieve a more balanced and stable expansion of trade between the two countries. They showed a clear understanding of this point of view. We discussed further developments of policy that are taking place in Japan. During my talks with the Japanese Minister of International Trade and Industry we affirmed our concern that confidence in the possibility of such an expansion should not be weakened by difficulties arising from the marketing of particular products. I stressed the need for early action to remedy such difficulties. We agreed that a further meeting of officials should be held in early September to review the progress that had been made by that time.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that reply. Has he intimated to the Japanese authorities that unless there are clear signs over the next few months of an opening up of trade opportunities for British exporters, Her Majesty's Government may be forced to review the freedom with which Japanese exporters of ball-bearings and textiles in particular are at present allowed to enter the British market?

Yes, the Japanese Ministers realised that there were some comparatively worrying elements in their own market and its accessibility to British exporters. They also realised the difficulties that their exporters were causing in a number of specialised fields here. This was the whole subject of my discussions with them.

Following the point raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Billericay (Mr. McCrindle), is it not true that Japanese practices in relation to imports into Japan and in relation to foreign investment in Japan are relatively more strict than those found in other most advanced industrial countries? Bearing in mind Japan's tremendous prosperity, has the time not come when the Japanese could safely relax these practices?

Yes, I think they realise that Japan has passed the point of becoming a great industrial success and that it does not need to take precautionary measures which perhaps were considered appropriate in the past. I am sure that the measures I discussed with them while I was in Tokyo were such as to give effect to the objectives outlined by my hon. Friend.

The imports of certain products have been causing a great deal of alarm in this country and we are grateful to the Secretary of State for giving the matter the urgency it requires, albeit after some delay. Can the Secretary of State say what he hopes to achieve in the short term in relation to ball-bearings, polyester fibre and electronics coming into this country from Japan and what safeguards he intends revoking under the Anglo-Japanese trade agreement if a good response is not forthcoming?

On the first point, I discussed specific measures with the Japanese in order to ease the pressure concerning a certain number of items to which the right hon. Gentleman referred. The Japanese recognised the problems with which I faced them. The safeguard provisions are those which allow the British Government, if necessary, to impede the further import of goods here in certain circumstances. The circumstances are clearly stated and would have to be met in any given case.

Does my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State realise that owing to cut-throat Japanese competition the firm of RHP in my constituency is facing up to 400 further redundancies in addition to 400 already faced in November? Since he has had the stamina to go to Japan, will he come to Chelmsford to see what he can do to help in this appalling human and social situation?

I entirely understand the great concern my hon. Friend has in this matter. I have had the opportunity of discussions with the management of RHP and I have forcefully brought to the attention of the Japanese the particular problems of the ball-and-roller-bearing industry. Specific proposals for the relief of the situation in this industry have been discussed with them.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will order an inquiry into the extent of misleading advertising for alleged slimming aids.

No, Sir. If misleading advertisements are being published the need is to suppress them rather than to count them.

Is the Minister aware of the recent report prepared by Which? showing the scandalously misleading way in which some slimming aids and remedies are being advertised? Is it not correct that there are many people who are overweight and badly need medical attention, and does he not agree that misleading advertisements about slimming should not be allowed?

Yes, I have read the article to which the hon. Gentleman referred. The right way to deal with the problemis for the British Code of Advertising Practice to be correctly applied.

Could the hon. Gentleman say whether any study is being undertaken in his Department into to need for a stronger watchdog body to supervise advertising? Does he realise that 99 per cent. of the British public do not know of the existence of the Advertising Standards Association? Is he further aware that it is just as well they do not know of its existence because this association has a derisory budget with which to try to control the standards of advertising amounting to over £1,000 million?

The best answer I can give is to say that the Trade Descriptions Act and other legislation are adequate to deal with advertising on this subject which is false to a material degree.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is his estimate of the amount to be spent annually over the next three years in Scotland as a result of the new regional policies.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to him in reply to a similar Question on 17th April, 1972.—[Vol. 8, c. 1.]

Is it not the case that the Government have no idea of the total cost? When they drafted their legislation, did they not have some figure before them, or is this just a blank cheque with the Government unaware of how much or how little these policies would cost?

No, Sir. The Government clearly set out in paragraph 59 of the White Paper the estimates for Great Britain as a whole. It is not practicable to make forecasts for individual areas.

Does my hon. Friend not agree that the amount to be spent will be considerably more than Scotland has ever enjoyed in the past and will lead to a substantial reduction in the unemployment figures?

Yes, my hon. Friend is absolutely right in saying that the Government's proposals measure up to the biggest-ever incentive to investment and the biggest-ever differential to the regions.

Would the hon. Gentleman not agree that the unemployment figure in Scotland is the greatest we have seen for many a year?

I agree that there was a gratifying fall last month.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what action he is proposing in order to in crease exports and remove the deficit on the balance of trade.

The country's export performance reflects the results achieved by individual exporters. The Government provide a wide range of services to support these exporters in their efforts. The British Overseas Trade Board is at present conducting a review of these services.

Is that not a disappointing reply since it shows that neither the Minister nor the Department intends to take any steps to remedy the position? Is it not a serious situation when the average balance of payments deficit reaches £55 million a month, as has been the case since the beginning of the year? Is he not concerned about the reduction in the number of cars exported and about the corresponding increase in the number of cars imported—

Order. Enough is enough. The hon. Lady has already asked three supplementary questions. That is as many as I can allow.

Does the Minister not think he ought to do something about it?

The hon. Lady is correct if she thinks that I should be concerned that our export figures, whether related to cars or to anything else, should be as good as they possibly can be. But, as my reply indicated, it is up to individual exporters to do this job and up to the Government to provide the best export services they can. I believe our export services are the best in the world.

Does my right hon. Friend not agree that for this country a favourable balance of visible trade is a damaging absurdity?

I can at least agree that this has happened on only a handful of occasions in the last hundred years.

What exactly has the British Overseas Trade Board been doing?

The British Overseas Trade Board is properly considering, with a great deal of care, the considerable amount of money it spends on behalf of the Government, and I am sure it will soon be making a full report.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what inquiries have been received for the Government advance factories on the Kitty-brewster Estate, Blyth; what are the prospects in regard to job opportunities in the advance factories during the next six months; and if he will make a statement .

Negotiations are in progress with firms interested in both vacant advance factories on the Department's Blyth Estate. Job prospects will depend on these negotiations and on the type of industry attracted.

Is the Minister aware that we are not taking adequate opportunities in regard to the available advance factories in development districts? Does he not agree that there are far too many job opportunities lying wasted in un-tenanted advance factories? Therefore, will the Government take special measures in the coming weeks to remedy the situation?

On the narrow point of the estate to which the Question refers, I understand that it is owned by the local authority. My answer was related to Government advance factories. If there is any difficulty over this matter, perhaps any confusion can be cleared in correspondence. On the general point, it is desirable to get the empty advance factories occupied as soon as possible, and the measures announced by the Government in the Industry Bill and our general economic measures should assist in this direction.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that whether we are thinking of an advance factory in Kitty-brewster or a factory anywhere else in the North East of England, the reflation of the economy undertaken by the present Government is one of the most encouraging features of economic life which we have known in the North East of England for many years?

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of the reply, I give notice that I shall seek to raise this matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has now made of the amount of compensation which the United Kingdom will have to pay to non-European Economic Community countries upon joining the European Economic Community as a result of raising tariff barriers against those countries.

Any compensation due for the withdrawal of tariff concessions by countries acceding to the Community will fall to be provided by the enlarged Community as a whole. It will be assessed in negotiations with the countries principally affected.

Does the Minister agree that we shall have to pay our proportion of the compensation? Is this not a matter which should come before the House so that we all know what is involved in joining the EEC?

The hon. Gentleman is incorrect if he assumes that compensation will necessarily be due, since accession to the Community will involve reductions in some tariffs which will have to be balanced against the increases elsewhere.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what research has been undertaken into the likely effects on the machine tool industry of increased expenditure by public bodies under his recently announced scheme.

The £9–10 million scheme for additional Government purchases of machine tools was based on an evaluation of the difficulties facing the industry by the Machine Tool Economic Development Council.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is a tremendous amount of concern among workers in the industry about how much of this money they will get? Since I have already been told in countless answers that the Department cannot differentiate between money spent on British machine tools and that spent on foreign machine tools, may I be told how we can be certain that any of this money will be spent on British machine tools?

I appreciate the hon. Gentleman's point, but he must understand, and I think he does understand, that we are bound by international trading agreements. In this respect there is no difference between the present Administration and the previous Administration in what has been done in abiding by these agreements. But, as my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State estimated earlier, only a very small proportion would be imported machines. This is borne out by a survey undertaken two years ago which showed that purchasing by universities and technical institutions amounted to no more than 3 per cent.

Is my hon. Friend aware that machine tool manufacturers in my constituency have found a considerable reluctance on the part of education authorities to purchase other than very small machines, which are not suitable for industrial training? Will he have words with the Department of Education and Science and ask them to urge the spending institutions to recognise the case for the purchase of machine tools of adequate size and scope?

I appreciate what my hon. Friend says, although I do not necessarily confirm that that is the situation. I will discuss it with the Department concerned.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the workers of Churchill Machine Tools at Altrincham have completely given up hope that that establishment will be saved by the Government and have resigned themselves to redundancies? Therefore, will he now say flatly whether the Government will save Churchill Machine Tools before it is too late?

That does not arise out of the Question on the Order Paper, but if the hon. Gentleman cares to put a Question down on this matter, I will do my best to answer it.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will seek to amend the Civil Aviation Act to give the Civil Aviation Authority more effective powers to deal with abuses of charter flight regulations.

No, Sir. The relevant parts of the Civil Aviation Act came into force only on 1st April. We must clearly allow some time before we can assess sensibly how they are working.

Has my hon. Friend read the article in a recent issue of the Daily Mail by Mr. Gilchrist in which he gave, in a long account, chapter and verse of the way in which not only were regulations breached but many passengers were swindled, although it should be said that many of them were conniving at the breach of regulations? Can my hon. Friend assure me that steps will be taken to put an end to this sort of abuse?

I have seen the article. It certainly shows that passengers who cut corners in this way do so at considerable cost in terms of comfort and dignity and also money. I welcome the enterprise of the Daily Mail in making this clear again. Enforcement is a matter for the Civil Aviation Authority, and no doubt my hon. Friend will have seen the recent statement by its chairman.

Could not the airlines do a lot to deal with this matter by charging much more realistic fares on normal flights?

I expect the hon. Gentleman will have seen that fares are inclining downwards and that he welcomes this.

What measures are taken by the Department to check the bona fidesof these charter operators, and especially the affinity group charters, where there seems to be more illegality practised than in any other form of chartering? To what extent are exempt charters, which the Department gave to BOAC and British-Caledonian, helping to cut down the illegal charter trade?

Staff are employed on this work by the Civil Aviation Authority and I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman his answer off hand. Exempt charters have nothing to do with this matter.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will take steps, under the Weights and Measures Act, 1963, to ensure that talcum and face powders are sold in prescribed quantities.

These powders vary so much in density, composition, quality, price and performance, that I doubt whether in general it would be helpful to the average purchaser.

Will my hon. Friend take note that I think it high time that we had a woman at the Department of Trade and Industry, who would give more practical answers than that?

I am always obliged to my hon. Friend for her advice and I am sure that my right hon. Friend will have taken due note. But it remains a fact that the proposition she makes would be of little help to consumers, male or female.

On what criterion does the Department of Aerospace weigh the performance of talcum powders?

My Department is responsible for answering Questions on this subject because of its overall responsibility for standards, weights and measures. If the hon. Gentleman is asking for a personal view on this matter, I should be happy to talk to him outside.

Is my hon. Friend aware that an earlier supplementary question referred to practical help? Is it not a fact that practical help given by the present Government has been to reduce purchase tax on all cosmetics from 55 per cent. to 25 per cent. and that this is aiding millions of female consumers?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for pointing that out.

Does not the hon. Gentleman realise that the Government have been guilty of gross failure in consumer protection and that their disinterest in unit packaging is one more demonstration of that fact? Will he tell us when or whether the Government intend to implement the recommendations made by Crowther on consumer protection well over a year ago?

The latter part of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary question does not arise out of the Question on the Order Paper. He must await a statement on that matter. In making the allegation in the first part of his supplementary question, he is ignorant of the facts. It is the present law that any package of talcum or face powder weighing 12 grammes or more must be marked with the net weight. If a package is not so marked, it must weigh less than 12 grammes, which, as the hon. Gentleman knows, is slightly over one-third of an ounce.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received about the position of the United Kingdom paper industry in relation to current international negotiations; and if he will make a statement.

We have been in close and constant touch with the United Kingdom paper and board industry about the negotiations in Brussels between the EEC and the EFTA non-candidate countries. We shall continue to consult the United Kingdom industry as these negotiations proceed.

Is it not the case that there is great fear in the British paper industry, which is still employing some 80,000 people who are likely to get the worst of both worlds by entry into the EEC and who have expressed dissatisfaction with the latest proposals from the Government? If the Government are prepared to issue warnings to the Japanese about such matters as ball-bearings and their aggressive selling techniques, would it not be helpful to do the same to Scandinavians on the question of the sale of paper to this country?

I appreciate that the paper industry has expressed considerable fears but as far as I am aware—and I have met its leaders on one or two occasions recently—it is not worried about any statement from the Government but about the mandate produced in Brussels, with which the United Kingdom has already expressed disagreement.

Is it not a fact that, while Britain may have expressed its disagreement, if the Council of Ministers nevertheless comes to an agreement, whether the paper makers like it or not, this House can do nothing about it once the Government have agreed with the Council of Ministers in Brussels?

The key to the reply is in the hon. Gentleman's last few words. Once we have agreed with the Council of Ministers there is nothing else we can do, but we are doing our best to see that the right answer is achieved both for our former partners in EFTA and for our own paper industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on the prospects for refining North Sea oil in Great Britain.

It is too early to make any detailed assessment of the scale of operations. However the United Kingdom has a large refining industry, and there is every likelihood that companies will refine substantial quantities of North Sea oil in Great Britain.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that this Question is really about jobs? There is great concern, particularly in Scotland, in relation to how the new oil finds will be exploited. Some people are beginning to think they have already been betrayed by the Government. Does not the hon. Gentleman agree that it would be ridiculous if oil found off our shores were refined in another country?

There are three parts to that supplementary question. First, I deny that the Government are not doing everything possible to ensure the greatest exploration in the North Sea—greater than in any other oilfield anywhere in the world at any time. Secondly, the hon. Gentleman must realise that under the operating contracts the oil has to be landed in the United Kingdom. Lastly, oil refineries are very capital intensive and do not create many jobs.

Will my hon. Friend tell us why Chevron was not able to build a refinery on the Clyde?

That is a question for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland, since such planning permission comes under his Department.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is the total number of tons of coal imported during the past two years; what was the average price per ton; and what is the estimated imported tonnage for the next twelve months.

7·4 million metric tonnes for the two years ended April, 1972, at an average cif value of £9·39 per metric tonne. It should however be noted that the average value is not a true price as it is influenced by the varying qualities of coal, different transport costs and other factors. Future imports will depend on decisions by importers and the requirements of consumers.

Does not the hon. Gentleman think it disgraceful that we should be importing coal when threats are going around our own coalfields that certain pits, including one in my area, might be closed even if there is plenty of coal still in them? What steps will the Government take, if these pits close, to make alternative work available? What help have the Government given to the National Coal Board in its experiments on coal blending so that we can manage without the importation of special coals?

In answer to the last point, the Government are seriously considering, and are in negotiation with the NCB about, bringing forward to the House measures to assist the coal industry. As to the hon. Gentleman's first point, it must be made clear that the importation of coal into this country was necessary after the strike, because of the low levels of supplies. It is a matter of competitiveness, and the NCB realises that very well.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will introduce legislation to provide machinery for the enforcement of maximum resale prices of electricity determined in accordance with Section 29 of the Electricity Act, 1957.

No, Sir—for the reasons explained in the reply to the hon. Member's Question on 28th February.—[Vol. 832, c. 31–2.]

Is the Minister aware that Section 29 of the Act is useless in practical terms without legal machinery for enforcement, and will the Government take note of the fact that tenants themselves are reluctant to challenge landlords who overcharge?

I realise that there is a serious problem here, and it is for that reason that a major campaign is to be waged to publicise the rights which exist under present legislation about maximum resale prices of both electricity and gas.

Could the Minister state how many actions have been brought under Section 29?

I am sorry—not without notice.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent communication he has received from the Brewers' Society about the tied house system in the licensed trade; and if he will make a statement.

None, Sir. But I will be pleased to give the hon. Member what information I can if he will let me know what specific point he has in mind.

I am about to do that. Does the Minister understand that some brewers are using the tied house system to treat tenants in a way which would have been regarded as disgraceful in the eighteenth century? Is he aware that hundreds of tenants who operate successful businesses are being kicked out for no reason other than that the brewers wish to maximise profits, and that they want both retail as well as wholesale profits? Does he not think that instead of letting them act like tyrants he should deal with them by breaking many of the ties operating in this trade?

The picture which the hon. Member presents certainly differs from the information we have in the Department. There have been a few cases in which it has been alleged that the Brewers' Society recommendations relating to choice of drinks at tied houses have not been complied with. We take these up with the individuals concerned. Cases so far have been few, but if the hon. Member would like to give me some cases we will do our best to help in what we know is a genuine problem.

In view of the tendency of the brewers to replace licensees by managers, are the Government taking any action in the near future on the Erroll Report on the whole question of tied houses? Is it not time that the whole tied house system was abolished?

Certainly not.

Questions about the Committee chaired by Lord Erroll, as the hon. Gentleman knows, are for the Home Secretary.

Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that on the tied house system the Monopolies Commission reported that it operated against the public interest, that it restricted competition, that it was detrimental to the efficiency of the trade, and that it should be ended? Have the Government any intention of acting on that?

According to my information, which may be wrong on this, the Monopolies Commission's only recommendation in its report on the supply of beer was for a substantial relaxation of the licensing laws.

In view of the unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I give notice that I will seek to raise the matter at the earliest opportunity.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects the independent assessor will conclude his evaluation of the price to be paid for the assets taken over from Rolls-Royce Limited by Rolls-Royce (1971) Limited.

The assessor appreciates the need for a price to be settled as soon as possible and is presently discussing his timetable with the parties involved, who are both anxious to see a speedy conclusion. It is too early to say when his deliberations will be concluded.

Does the Minister agree that it is 16 months since the assets were taken over, that obviously it will be several months before a price is agreed, that there should now be an interim payment to the liquidator so that he can make payments to creditors, many of whom are in capital goods and engineering and machine tool companies, and that this would be an efficient way to improve employment and orders in capital equipment industries?

My hon. Friend's suggestion is a matter for the joint liquidators. I understand that they have announced that distribution of at least 10 per cent. will be made in September whether or not the Rolls-Royce (1971) assets price has been determined by then.

Does the Minister not realise the very serious hardship there is in my constituency in Derby, hardship caused to creditors, and particularly to workers who own shares in the company, and also to ordinary share shareholders, by this extraordinary delay and that it is simply not good enough to put everything back on to the liquidator?

I am aware that the consequences of this bankruptcy are widespread, although the hon. Member will not expect me to say more on the subject of workers' shares beyond what I said in the Adjournment debate the other night. I think it is understood that where there is wide disagreement between the parties the procedure of going to an assessor to reach an agreement is one which must be gone through in the public interest.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a further statement on his discussions with the Confederation of British Industry about the future of its price restraint scheme and its application to the nationalised industries.

I have nothing to add to what I told my hon. Friend on 17th Apriland 8th May and to what was said by my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister on 18th May.—[Vol. 835, c. 26;Vol. 836, c. 252; Vol. 837, c. 688.]

In view of the rather worrying indications in this morning's Financial Times survey of business intentions that cost inflation may be accelerating once more after nine months of the CBI scheme, is my right hon. Friend still of opinion that renewal of the scheme will be worth while, particularly in view of the inflationary impact on the finances of nationalised industries?

Yes, I do not at all withdraw from the belief that the effect of the renewal of the CBI scheme will be to continue to slow down the pace of inflation and that this will be most valuable in this very severe battle which we are all having to fight.

Can the right hon. Gentleman in this connection say what discussions he has had with British Rail concerning the operation of the price-fixing agreement, and the increase in charges for, and the application of the CBI initiative to, cross-Channel ferry charges? Will he stiffen the resolve of British Rail to break the price-fixing agreement?

Yes, I am aware of very considerable concern in this field and I am discussing the matter at the moment.

In view of the flexibility of Government policy, as indicated by the Industry Bill, can my right hon. Friend say whether he has any proposal to set up a public authority charged with the task of monitoring proposed major price and wage settlements, reminiscent of the Prices and Incomes Board?

No. I have no such intention. My hon. Friend will no doubt be aware that the CBI itself has applied certain monitoring arrangements in relation to its own price restraint policy.

Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether talks have been held with the Commission in Brussels about the extent to which it would be in order to apply a price restraint policy to nationalised industries? Secondly, in connection with the question he has just been asked, would he be a little more forthcoming about Government intentions at future NEDC meetings where the whole question of inflation is to be discussed?

As regards the Commission, the right hon. Gentleman will be aware that in certain fields of nationalised industry the present Government's position is changed by accession to the Community. This is a matter which has been debated considerably in the House. Otherwise, there has been, as far as I know, no specific discussion of the Government's position in relation to nationalised industries as regards these matters. NEDC regularly reviews the whole question of the activities undertaken throughout the economy to try to restrain the pace of inflation. This is part of its normal task, and has been for many years during which the right hon. Gentleman and I have been connected with it.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, when he last met representatives of the Gas Council.

Meetings take place as necessary. The last was just before the holiday.

Can the hon. Gentleman say whether at the meeting any discussion took place criticising the policy of gas boards of charging consumers for the work involved in tracing possible gas leaks? These charges are deeply resented by consumers, and surely it is the duty of the gas boards to safeguard the general public from possible explosions, and they should not charge consumers who report leaks.

Two questions arise here. As for the discussions, these are of course, confidential, and are mainly to obtain the greatest degree of co-operation between the Department and the boards. Secondly, I would say that this is a commercial matter which varies from board to board. It is left to the boards to make their own decisions.

Would the hon. Gentleman tell the House when he last met the trade unions concerned with the gas industry and what matter was discussed then?

Meetings take place as necessary. The last was just before the holiday.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he expects to be in a position to make a statement about Government support for an uprated version of the RB211 engine.

Rolls-Royce (1971) Ltd. sent the Department earlier this month a proposal for Government funding of the launch cost of an uprated RB211, and will shortly be sending further supporting material. It will take us some time to give the proper consideration to this major proposal.

Does the hon. Gentleman recollect the remarks of the former Minister for Aerospace to me on 29th February during an Adjournment debate initiated by my hon. Friend the Member for West Lothian (Mr. Dalyell)? The Minister said that no serious time would be lost if the decision on the uprated engine were made at about the same time as Lockheed's proposals for an airframe. Is he aware that we have now had Lockheed's proposals for over a month? Is it not a fact that serious time will be lost unless this decision is made speedily?

I would not necessarily accept the implication of the hon. Gentleman's supplementary. I can tell him that at the most recent meeting with Mr. Haughton he accepted that the time-scale of our decision fits in with his requirements.

While recognising the importance of the RB211 and the Lockheed 10–11, may I ask my hon. Friend to assure the House that the A300B is not being neglected in all these discussions? Could he say something about the discussions that may have taken place or have yet to take place between Rolls-Royce and Aerospatiale on the possible fitting of the RB211 in the A300B?

I do not think that the A300B is being neglected, but it is for the airlines in the first instance to express an interest in the matter. I cannot answer my hon. Friend's second question offhand, but if he puts down a Question about it. I will certainly give him the information.

Can the hon. Gentleman say what kind of prospective orders the Government would need to feel reasonably assured about a stretched version of the TriStar before they were willing to fund the stretched version of the RB211?

This is a matter for the Lockheed Corporation to satisfy us that it sees a market, and it would need to satisfy a number of other people as well. I cannot give any other information on that at the moment.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when the Government propose to issue their proposals for anew energy policy in substitution of the proposals outlined in Command Paper No. 3438 of 13th November, 1967.

Energy questions are kept under regular review but there is at present no intention of publishing proposals on the subject.

It would seem that the Department is dragging its feet on this. Will the Minister bear in mind that our imminent entry into Europe, the nationalisation of British assets abroad such as IPC and other important factors make it necessary to have an urgent review and to introduce new proposals which would replace the 1967 White Paper?

As I said in my Answer, the matter is under constant review. The events to which my hon. Friend refers underline how difficult it is to fix any long-term policy which is sustainable in the light of the many changes which are constantly occurring in this area.

In view of the uncertainty overshadowing both the price and the supply of overseas oil and the fast deteriorating balance of payments situation, may I ask the right hon. Gentleman, if he comes forward with proposals suggested in his hon. Friend's question, whether he will make sure that they are based on the maximum practical use of indigenous fuels?

Of course I will take very fully into account the advantages of indigenous fuels in terms both of their security and of their contribution to the balance of payments situation. These are important matters in the continuous con- sideration of these problems which is going on.

Since the right hon. Gentleman told the House on 11th March that natural gas would last for only 20 years and that we could never hope to have even our present capacity of oil, would the right hon. Gentleman agree that this means that we should examine our energy policy and that there should be new coal sinkings to give us more self-sufficiency?

I should like to reaffirm what I said in reply to these questions. The matter is under continuous and constant review in the light of the changing circumstances. I should also like to sound a note of caution over the hon. Gentleman's ready assumption that we have only 20 years' supply of natural gas. This was not precisely what I said. These are the present levels of estimates of reserves.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will take steps to set up a United Kingdom Space Agency.

Consideration is being given to the recommendation on this matter by the Select Committee on Science and Technology, together with their other recommendations, and a statement will be made to the House in due course.

While I welcome that reply, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he does not agree that one reason why this country has a less-than-first-line showing in space has been the lack of either single ministerial responsibility or a Government agency to control our space programme? Is he aware that this has led to fragmentation which has resulted in our having a not particularly viable national space technology?

I would not necessarily go all the way with my hon. Friend but certainly we are aware that the Science and Technology Committee saw a powerful case for centralisation and we are getting on with our consideration of this matter—which has been going on for some time—as fast as we can.

As the Chairman of the Sub-Committee of the Select Committee on Science and Technology which made this recommendation, may I ask the hon. Gentleman to tell us why it is taking the Government so long to make a statement?

The hon. Gentleman will be the first to understand that the issues involved include establishing the purpose and objectives of the United Kingdom space activity, and we cannot rush a decision on that.

May I remind my bon. Friend, when he is thinking about the time taken for these reviews, that before he was promoted to his present post he was well known for the cry of "Too long" when supplementaries went on?

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for reminding me of my youthful indiscretions.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that in the next few weeks some critical decisions will have to be taken affecting our future in space in the next decade, and that due to fragmentation, with at least four Ministers and a dozen offices being responsible for this matter, there is no coherent policy such as there is in the United States with NASA? Do he and his colleagues appreciate the grave urgency of this matter?

If I am right in thinking that the hon. Gentleman is trying to anticipate his own Question about a space shuttle, I can assure him that this is very much a factor to be taken into account.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the value of trade between the United Kingdom and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics in the periods March, 1970, to March, 1971, and March, 1971, to March, 1972, respectively.

Information on trade by country is published in the Annual Statement of Trade and the monthly Overseas Trade Statistics. In the years ended March, 1971, and March, 1972, imports cif were £216 million and £200 million; exports fob were £93 million and £92 million.

What was the effect on trade of the Foreign Office rumpus over the Soviet diplomats?

It is difficult to make any accurate calculations of the effect. It is true that one or two quite major events are being mounted in Moscow this year with the approval of the Government. The particular factor which they claimed was doing damage—the high rate of interest on export guarantees—has been brought down to a competitive figure.

Will my right hon. Friend accept my assurance that there is much pleasure and satisfaction in many parts of the House that no sanctions operate against the Soviet Union in spite of the fact that many of the internal policies followed by that nation are repugnant to many on this side of the House and an affront to human nature?

My task is to try to improve trade with as little interference as possible from party politics.

In view of the recent visit by President Nixon, which opens up serious possibilities of American trade with the Soviet Union, can the right hon. Gentleman tell the House how things stand with the technical agreement we signed in 1968 with the Soviet Union and the extent to which the COCOM restriction, which was very restrictive with regard to our exports, is likely to be modified now that the Americans are anxious to develop trade?

The right hon. Gentleman may well be right that there will be some re-thinking of some of the COCOM rules. I cannot intelligently anticipate what may flow from President Nixon's visit to Moscow but we shall continue to treat it as a very serious market and hope to succeed there.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received from the Society for the Control and Registration of Estate Agents and Mortgage Brokers concerning the need for the introduction of legislation to require the compulsory registration of estate agents and mortgage brokers; and if he will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend has received a letter this morning; it will be considered and a reply sent in due course.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that any unqualified person can establish a business of this character, that he does not require to join any professional organisation and that it is a business in which substantial clients' monies, are held and yet there is no requirement to operate a clients' account? Is he further aware that many people have been defrauded by unscrupulous estate agents and that there is therefore a need for legislation to ensure that proper professional practices are operated by these organisations?

I do accept that there are possibilities of abuse in this area. I can only tell the hon. Gentleman that the number of complaints about estate agents and mortgage brokers has been very small indeed. As my right hon. Friend has announced, we are giving sympathetic consideration to the Crowther recommendation for a licensing system in the area of consumer credit which would include mortgage brokers. In the other sphere it seems that the regulations being carried out voluntarily by the national societies are having a considerable effect.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that far from trying to increase restrictive practices in estate agency we ought to be endeavouring to make it as easy to buy and sell a second-hand house as it is to buy and sell a second-hand car?

Perhaps, but on the whole, from my experience recently, buying and selling a second-hand house is a little more expensive than buying and selling a second-hand car. Therefore, consumers are rightly seriously interested to see that their money is safe.

Why are the Government only able to tell us that they are still giving sympathetic consideration to the Crowther recommendation, 15 months or more after it was made? What is causing the delay? Why cannot the Government come forward with proposals?

The hon. Gentleman is asking the House to join him in being particularly naive. We have a tremendous amount of legislation in the House at the moment [AN HON. MEMBER: "Withdraw some".] We shall before long be coming forward with our suggestions in this area.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what steps he is taking to bring about the further reorganisation of the nuclear reactor industry.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what action the Government intends to take in relation to the recommendations in the Vinter Committee Report.

The Government are reviewing all aspects of the country's investment in nuclear power, including the ground covered by the Vinter Committee; and is consulting the nuclear industry and other parties concerned. Its decisions will be made known to the House as soon as possible.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree that the future shape of the nuclear reactor industry is of the greatest importance to the technology and industry of this country? Does not the House deserve to know what the Vinter Committee has recommended? If that information cannot be given, at least may we have a statement rather better than that which the hon. Gentleman has just made?

The answer to the first part of the hon. Gentleman's question is "Yes". The answer to the second part is that there is a great deal of commercial information which is highly confidential and publication of which would be very damaging to some interests in this country. I do not think that anyone in the House would want that action taken. As soon as it is possible, a statement will be made to the House as a matter of urgency.

Would my hon. Friend give an assurance that before any decisions are taken, full consideration will be given to the problems of environmental pollution and safety which the United States has come up against in its systems?

That is certainly a major problem. It is of concern to many people, and there are certainly worries about safety in the United States nuclear power programme.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the statement he has made is itself impossible in that it will affect our own exports or possible exports of nuclear systems and that until the Government are ready to come out with a full statement this industry will simply not be able to make progress? If there are parts of the Vinter Committee Report which are commercially secret, can these not be deleted so that the House may know what are the alternatives, because we simply will not acept the say-so of the Government without the backup evidence when the Committee comes forward with its recommendations?

There are two parts to the right hon. Gentleman's question Dealing first with the possibility of publishing the report, it is essential that Ministers in any Government should be able to have the very best advice given to them which can be held to be confidential. Also, while we realise the major problems involved, it must be right to make the correct decision rather than taking one just for the sake of speed.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry, in view of the near-miss between two British Overseas Airways Corporation aircraft landing at Heathrow, what action he is taking to ensure that the lives of passengers and of those living in the vicinity of London Airport and in South-East England do not continue to be hazarded; how many near misses have taken place during the last year; and what has been the increase in the number of landings in that period.

It will be for the Civil Aviation Authority to take such action as it considers necessary when it has completed its investigation into this incident. I understand the Authority will be publishing in the Annual Survey of Accidents the numbers of air misses reported in the whole United Kingdom airspace during 1971 which gave rise to specific risk; during 1971 the number of landings was approximately the same as the previous year.

If the situation is now becoming serious and if the flight data processing system which was supposed to deal with this problem has failed to come into effect, and has to be looked at again, would not it be a wise pre- caution to reduce the number of landings at Heathrow until a new system has been brought into effect?

If anything, the number of near misses is declining slightly. As for the FDPS decision, this is likely to be announced soon. When it is announced, I hope that the Hon. Gentleman will recognise that considerations of safety have been taken into full account.

In the discussions that have gone on which are quite important to the British computer industry, has consideration been given to the Goodyear Staram system which looks as though it could be the sort of system which would avoid going overall American and yet still provide sufficient capacity to avoid this risk of collision?

Consideration of the technical issues involved is in the first instance a matter for the Civil Aviation Authority. I am advised that the Goodyear system by itself could not perform any meaningful ATC functions.

Is the Minister aware that every time an hon. Member asks a Question about Mediator, he is told that it is a matter for the Civil Aviation Authority? Cannot we have more information about this, especially since the number of near misses is not going down?

I am sure that the hon Gentleman and I will not agree, but I think that he ought to look again at my reply to the hon. Member for Putney (Mr. Hugh Jenkins).

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

I have as yet nothing to add to my reply to the hon. Member's similar Question on 8th May.—[Vol. 836, c. 257.]

Is not it highly unsatisfactory that this major industry, which employs very large numbers of people, should be in this continuing state of uncertainty about Government policy towards it? As for publication of the Marshall Committee Report, since there has been Press comment to the effect that the report is a worthless document, would not it be only fair to Sir Robert Marshall as well as useful to the industry that the report should be published now, with any deletion of confidential information? Is not it thoroughly unsatisfactory that we have a number of reports concerning major industries about which this House is completely uninformed?

I do not accept that the aircraft industry is in a state of uncertainty about the Government's attitude towards it. It is one of support, and a great deal better support than the hon. Gentleman's Government gave it at one time. I have nothing to say about Press comment. We are anxious that a statement should be made, but there is no question of publishing the report.

Even so, will my hon. Friend sympathetically consider publishing either a Green Paper or a White Paper on the future of the aircraft industry as the Government now see it?

The House will receive the fullest information at the appropriate moment. I should welcome a debate.

Have the Government reflected on the effect of their decision on subcontractors such as Reyrolle-Parsons?

I have no notice that there is such an effect.

Is my hon. Friend aware that one of the very many leaks that there have been is to the effect that two major air-frame groups, Hawker Siddeley and BAC, are to be merged? In view of the Rolls-Royce experience, should not my hon. Friend be encouraging European groupings in future?

I note what my hon. Friend says, though it would not necessarily produce a smaller unit. In any event, this is a matter in the first instance for the firms concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he has received the communication entitled "Textiles the Challenge", published by the Textile Industry Support Campaign, sent to him by the hon. Member for West Ham, North, asking for steps to be taken to protect the textile industry on British entry to the European Economic Community; and whether he will make a statement on the action he proposes in the light of it.

I am grateful to the hon. Member for providing me with a copy of this communication. I am in close consultation with the United Kingdom textile industry as a whole, about these points.

Having seen this document, the Minister will be aware that the textile industry is very worried and anxious about the Government going into the Common Market without the full-hearted consent of the people and Parliament. Will the right hon. Gentleman tell his right hon. and hon. Friends and those of my right hon. and hon. Friends who represent constituencies concerned with the textile industry that they ought to listen to their electors on this important question?

I am aware that there are a number of sections in the textile industry, all of which do not always speak with one voice, which have considerable worries. That is why I meet them regularly. Discussions have also taken place in Brussels on this important subject.

Will my right hon. Friend consider publishing the letter on this subject that his Parliamentary Secretary sent me recently which would give some assurance to the textile industry in Lancashire?

I will consider that; though, as the letter was to my hon. Friend, I see no reason why he should not publish it himself.

Is not it clear that it would be absurd to wait until after 1st January, 1973, to do something about cotton yarn quotas especially in view of the high level of unemployment in Lancashire? Will not the right hon. Gentleman therefore act now to ensure that quotas on cotton yarn are retained on 1st January, 1973?

I cannot promise to act on this subject now, but we are actively discussing these matters with the Committee.