asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received from the Garnock Valley (Action for Industry Committee) on the future of the Scottish steel industry; and what reply he has sent.

The Committee wrote last February. The reply said that the British Steel Corporation was studying the future pattern of Scottish steel making; that major investment decisions would follow the report of the Joint Steering Group; and that the Government would take account of employment implications in considering the BSC's proposals.

Is the Minister aware that just over a week ago more than 5,000 people from the Garnock Valley took part in the largest-ever post-war demonstration in Ayrshire protesting against the British Steel Corporation's decision to close down the Garnock Valley steelworks, which employs 54 per cent, of the male population in the valley, and calling for Government action to direct industry into the valley before any redundancies are declared and pledging support for the STUC's campaign for a green field integrated steel mill at Hunterston? As the hon. Gentleman knows, these questions will not be resolved until we get the detailed plans of the Corporation and I should like the Minister to tell the House what action he has taken to press the Corporation for a quicker decision in these matters.

I am aware of what was said at the meeting which the hon. Gentleman mentioned. A decision about the future of an individual works is a matter for the Corporation. I understand that it has said that the future of Garnock Valley is under active consideration, but no decisions have yet been taken.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now seek to extend his powers to regulate the trading in stocks and shares by persons possessing inside information.

:The question of transactions in securities by persons with inside information is being studied in our review of company law.

I thank the right hon. Gentleman for that reply. In his review, will he take note of the fact that practices considered quite normal in the City of London could land people behind bars in Canada or the United States? Will he also take account of the recent recommendation of Justice that trading of this sort, not only in take-over situations but in everyday trading situations, should become a criminal offence?

I have very much under consideration the recommendations of Justice as well as those put forward by the Jenkins Committee some years ago. Provisions of the law are not wholly absent. There are, for instance, strong restrictions about dealings by directors of companies and their immediate families. But I appreciate that this matter exercises a good deal of public concern.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what studies his Department has made of car exhaust emission and safety standards legislation of foreign countries, in view of their restrictive effects on British car exports.

My Department keeps in touch with developments overseas, and co-operates closely with the Department of the Environment in encouraging the adoption of common standards in Europe and elsewhere.

Does the Minister realise that there may be particular difficulties for British manufacturers of smaller cars in meeting the stringent regulations based on the unique smog conditions of Los Angeles? Is he absolutely sure that all foreign companies, particularly those in the United States, are applying these regulations with the same stringency to their own domestic manufacturers as they are to their imports?

The hon. Gentleman refers to the regulations prevailing in the United States, but I have no reason to believe that those regulations are applied any differently to American manufacturers from the way in which they are applied to British and other foreign manufacturers, nor do I believe that British industry is incapable of meeting those standards.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the removal of tetraethyl lead from petrol will lead to very substantial upgrading in the price of petrol?

:As my hon. Friend knows, discussions on this matter are taking place and I would ask him to await the outcome.

Is the Minister aware that, whatever fears he may have about the effect on British car exports, he and his Department should do nothing to pressurise companies into having lower standards of emissions from exhausts than the standards which apply in the United States?

Our immediate concern is to co-ordinate action in this respect in Europe. This is one field among many in which common standards with our European partners make obvious sense.

Does the right hon. Gentleman realise that the adequacy of standards is as important as the question of co-ordination? The Government have propounded the principle that the polluter must pay the cost of clearing his own pollution, and indeed have imposed an extra cost of £1 million on the British Steel Corporation to clear up some of the debris left by the private sector. Is the right hon. Gentleman's Department having any discussion with the industry to see whether it would be practicable to impose stricter controls on car exhaust emissions in this country?

Yes, Sir; in co-operation with the Department of the Environment we are having discussions with the companies.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assistance his Department has provided to the British Steel Corporation for the purpose of expanding its export potential.

The export services of the Department are available to BSC which subscribes to the Export Intelligence Service. There is close contact between the Department and the central organisation of BSC.

Is the Minister aware that in addition to the alarming number of redundancies in the steel industry in Scotland and elsewhere, redundancies are even threatened in my own constituency in a branch of the constructional engineering division? In view of the floating of the £ and the fact that as a consequence our steel exports should be a good deal more competitive than they were, will his Department use every effort to push up the export potential of the BSC?

The hon. Gentleman no doubt is aware that the greatest aid we can give to exports is to make sure that we have an efficient industry backed by very substantial investment. It is that very high level of investment which the Government are supporting in the British Steel Corporation and which will pay the biggest dividends.

Is not one consequence of floating the £ that the Government do not need to bother their heads about exports at all?

That gives rise to a wider question than falls to me to answer now.

In view of the fact that only recently we were told that this matter was being fully considered by the joint steering group and by McKinsey, will the Minister say how much steel will be exported assuming a target for 1980 of 28 million tons? In view of that target and bearing in mind the Chancellor of the Exchequer's assumption of a 5 per cent. growth rate by 1980, how much steel will have to be imported?

The Joint Steering Group figures cover a wide range of possible outcomes both at home and in regard to exports. The subsequent McKinsey Report has strengthened the Government's confidence in accepting them.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he is satisfied with the control of financial advertisements; and if he will make a statement.

The Trade Descriptions Act, 1968, makes it an offence for any person in the course of business to make knowingly or recklessly in any advertisement of services, which includes financial services, a statement which is false to a material degree. Other statutes impose further regulation on particular types of financial advertising and I am considering the proposals of the Crowther Committee on Consumer Credit for regulation of advertisements of consumer credit.

Is my right hon. Friend aware of the concern expressed in the Crowther Report about the content of some second mortgage advertisements? Would he give an assurance that if, having studied the matter, he feels that legislation should be brought forward for the protection of house owners, this will be done speedily?

I certainly agree with my hon. Friend about the importance of this aspect and we will have it in mind in drafting legislation.

Would the Minister care to inquire from the Newspaper Publishers Association why it is that some of the most reputable newspapers accept some of the most dubious advertisements?

That goes a little wider than the original question, but, as I said, both the Trade Descriptions Act and the other Acts concerned govern untrue statements which are made knowingly or recklessly.

Is the Minister satisfied that there are adequate safeguards for the British public in connection with insurance companies based in the Channel Islands? Did he see the report in The Guardian on 1st July which dealt with the Assured Investment Plan and which threw considerable doubt on the viability of the plans into which many people may have entered? In the circumstances, will he investigate the claims which are being made by those marketing these investment or insurance plans to see whether even a prosecution may be appropriate?

I will look at the case mentioned by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the volume of retail sales seasonally adjusted in the first quarter of 1972 compared with the same period of 1971; and whether he will make a statement.

There was an increase of over 3 per cent. after allowing for the reduced level of mail order business in the first quarter of 1971 due to the postal strike. The figures for April and May show a further growth in the volume of sales.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that answer. Does he feel that this indicates that the process of destocking has come to an end and that, once the process of restocking is in the pipeline, this will help industry in general?

Yes, I believe that to be the case and I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the matter. It seems to me that we are entering a period where consumer demand is growing strongly and where there is a recognisedneed to restock to make good stocks which have been seriously drawn down. This should give a further impetus to the level of production.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will seek to ensure that the interests of consumers and consumer organisations in the United Kingdom are appropriately represented on the Economic and Social Committee of the European Economic Community; if he will make a statement on the steps he is taking for that purpose.

I accept that consumers' interests have a good claim to representation. This is being taken into account in the consideration now being given to the task of finding suitable United Kingdom members for the Committee.

I am grateful for that encouraging reply. Since it is vital for the consumer to be adequately represented at the formative stage of directives and regulations in the Common Market, and since the present procedures are totally inadequate, should we not make certain that we have the strongest possible consumer representation amongst the 24 nominees to the Economic and Social Committee of the EEC?

I can give that assurance to my hon Friend, and he no doubt welcomed, as I did, the recent announcement by the Commission about the strengthening of its support on consumer matters.

Would the Government's picture not be more credible if they took a greater interest in consumer protection in the United Kingdom and showed some readiness to renegotiate the common agricultural policy, which will give a further lift to prices in 1973 and seriously affect the rate of inflation?

The right hon. Gentleman's question might lead us very far from the original Question, and I will not pursue it. However, I must point out that the Government's record on consumer protection is very satisfactory.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has recently received from textile interests concerning the European Economic Community negotiations; and what replies he has sent.

Recent representations from the textile industry have covered a wide variety of issues, including our negotiations with the European Economic Community. As my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade told the hon. Member for Heywood and Royton (Mr. Joel Barnett) on 5th June, my Department will keep the industry and the House informed at appropriate times.—[Vol. 838, c. 2#3.]

Is the Secretary of State aware that the estimate quoted by his right hon. Friend of 3,000 to 5,000 redundancies following the proposed ending of quotas on cotton textiles is regarded by both employers and unions alike in Lancashire as complacently conservative? In view of the special plight of the textile industry if Britain enters the EEC, will the Secretary of State at least commit himself to invoking Article 135 to give special protection to the industry, at least during the transitional period?

As I recall it, the figures quoted by my right hon. Friend were not of his devising. They were figures put to him on an advisory basis by those concerned with the industry, so they cannot be brushed aside very easily. The provisions of Article 135 exist in order to cater for a profound disruption of an industry. Undoubtedly the Government would not hesitate in such an event to have recourse to them. I assure the hon. Gentleman that that is so. However, the negotiations currently in hand with the Community on these and a wide variety of matters affecting the industry should not be prejudged at this stage. I am hopeful of a satisfactory result.

Whilst accepting that the hon. Member for Oldham, West (Mr. Meacher) always gets his facts and figures wrong in any question, is my right hon. Friend aware that the Textile Industry Support Campaign seems to be very alarmed over the situation regarding the Common Market and is not entirely supported by the whole industry? Is there anything that can be done to dissuade the Textile Industry Support Campaign from quoting rather wild figures of possible unemployment, which I do not think will come about?

My hon. Friend is right. The figures quoted by the Textile Industry Support Campaign seem to be grossly exaggerated. I am not unhopeful of the current discussions. So much remains yet to be clarified, both in relation to the position of cotton yarn and other matters which have been raised today. But it would be wrong to prejudge this issue at this stage.

Many people in Lancashire will not be as satisfied with the right hon. Gentleman's bland assurances as was the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mr. Normanton). The people of Lancashire can see that if cotton yarn is imported without quotas they will find themselves—although there may be arguments about the numbers—without jobs. If the right hon. Gentleman wants evidence of numbers in terms of what is happening in Europe, regardless of the precise evidence, he will find that the evidence is clearly there, in the amount of Europe's imports of cotton yarn, despite the fact that there is nominally a non-quota system. Therefore, will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance now that from 1st January next year he will invoke Article 135 which, as he said, is there for him to use?

:Whether the figures are those which have been put to me by the hon. Member who tabled the Question or those supplied by the Textile Industry Support Campaign, the numbers are still very much a matter of concern. There is a big problem here. The main reassurance the industry has is the fact that the Government did not hesitate to act forcefully on this subject last year when they were faced with similar problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he is now in a position to make a statement on the Government's policy towards the British computer industry.

The Government will be replying soon to those recommendations of the Select Committee on Science and Technology to which there has as yet been no response.

Do the Government intend to provide direct support for British firms other than ICL, perhaps by way of development contracts? Have they ruled out the possibility of setting up a consumer research and development board to administer all Government support for the industry on the lines suggested by the Select Committee on Science and Technology? Will he undertake to make a statement on this matter before the Summer Recess?

I can at least, in response to the third point, tell the hon. Member that I hope that I shall be able to make a statement before the Summer Recess and that included in it will be answers to his two previous Questions.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what was the value of new motor vehicles sold in April, 1972, as compared with April, 1971; and whether he will make a statement.

The information is given in "Trade and Industry" for 15th June. This shows that the value of new motor vehicles sold by the motor distribution and garage trades increased by 32 per cent.

While grateful for that reply, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether in fact there has been as great an increase in the number of vehicles sold as in the value, and also in the export sales as well?

I think it would be fair to say that it is not as yet, and if output has not kept pace with demand entirely it appears to be because of the industrial disputes from which the motor industry has suffered over recent months.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what further steps he proposes in order to improve security arrangements at airports and in the air.

:The development, implementation and checking of security measures is a continuing process and I have stressed to airport authorities and airlines that there must be no relaxation in the pressure that recent incidents have created. A Bill to provide powers to ratify the Montreal Convention will be introduced as soon as possible.

While that reply is satisfactory as far as it goes, is my hon. Friend persuaded that he has done enough in this matter? Does he realise that the evidence of hijackings accumulates every day and that a very serious dimension has been added to the measurement of safety of people who travel by air? Would he not consider taking advice from, for example, the Israeli authorities, who alone of all people appear to have an effective way of dealing with miscreants of this kind who are apprehended?

I would be prepared to take advice from any authority with experience of this very serious and growing menace, and I share my hon. Friend's concern, but I think he will appreciate that a great deal of work is done but which is not drawn to public attention, because it can immediately be counterproductive if one announces an additional security measure which one has just introduced

But the Government cannot shed their responsibility in this matter, having provided £1 million a year to airports and airlines to make the screening of passengers and baggage effective. Is the hon. Gentleman personally satisfied that the screening is adequate? Secondly, regarding the problem of "in the air", what line are the Government taking at the International Civil Aviation Organisation regarding concerted action by the ICAO States involved to tackle the hijacking problem?

I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will appreciate that with 7 million people departing from Heathrow alone in any one year it is not for me to give an assurance that each of the 7 million people is properly searched and scrutinised. But I think he fully appreciates that there can be no question of the Government not taking on fully their responsibilities, since we were the Government who only recently decided to make available £1 million so that financial restraint should not in any way hinder the airlines on which the primary responsibility for carrying out security work lies. He will be interested to know that when I met representatives of the pilots not long ago I assured them that the Government would take every effort they could to support international efforts now being made to make more effective the security precautions exercised, within the powers available to Governments throughout the world in the event of hijacking. I am sure the right hon. Gentleman will welcome my statement just now about the Montreal Convention.

Would my hon. Friend not agree that whatever one does there will always be almost the certainty that a really determined group of people can hijack an aeroplane, and would he not also agree, therefore, that the key to this whole problem is diplomatic pressures, as through the Montreal Convention, to ensure that hijackers are swiftly brought to justice?

I fully accept that, and I was able to assure the pilots on very much that point. I was immensely grateful, therefore, that they felt it unnecessary to proceed with the strike action threatened against this country, and that that was a result in some part of the assurance that I was able to give them. I would not care to go completely with my hon. Friend, for although I understand him when he says that one can never have 100 per cent. guarantee in this situation, if one looks at the numbers of offensive weapons found by security checks at airports in this country one will realise that there is no certainty that a determined group of people would get away with it. I would not like to allow such an impression to remain on the record.

Does the hon. Gentleman consider that the possible establishment in London of an office representing Arab terrorist organisations which have claimed responsibility for the hijacking and massacre at Lod is conducive to the security arrangements of which he has been speaking?

I think that should be a question for my right hon. Friend the Home Secretary, as distinct from my Department, for my Department is essentially concerned with dealing with the problems at the airports.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many inquiries from industrialists with regard to the Manchester travel-to-work area have been received since the designation of the new North-Western intermediate area on 22nd March, 1972; and how many new jobs in total, and for men and women, respectively, are expected to result from these inquiries

Twenty IDCs have been granted for projects estimated to provide 1,100 jobs. In addition there have been further applications for IDCs, 20 inquiries about factories and a large number of inquiries about our new incentives, from many of which job opportunities could arise.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that since his new policies were introduced with such a fanfare four months ago, what we have had in Manchester from these policies is all scrape and no bread? Is he aware that in these four months we have lost 4,500 jobs at Irlam and Churchill's and that all that he has been able to tell the House in that extremely complicated reply is that in less than three weeks there have been two inquiries which will produce no jobs? When will he give Manchester the jobs it needs?

I can accept none of that. The plain fact is that at Manchester and elsewhere there has been a substantial reduction in unemployment over recent months. The level of inquiries we have received in the North-Western office has increased, but even if it does not comfort the hon. Gentleman, there are very large numbers of people who are aware of the opportunities which the new incentives have provided and are sure that they are of benefit to the region.

Would my right hon. Friend not agree that some of the manifestations which there have been in certain sectors of industry in the North West have themselves been against encouraging industry to expand? Would he not highlight this as being an extremely good ground on which industry will continue to deteriorate so long as irresponsibility is of that order?

I believe that good industrial relations there and elsewhere are a tremendous asset to any region and that a number of companies have had successful expansion.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what additional employment for men is in prospect in Sunderland.

740 male jobs in the Sunderland Group of Employment Exchange Areas. This takes no account of jobs that may arise in the service sector.

Does the Minister realise that, welcome though it is, it does little more than match continuing redundancies and closures? Is he aware that the Secretary of State for Employment shocked the Sunderland Corporation recently by refusing to discuss with it the question of high and persistent unemployment in Sunderland? In view of this, would he consider discussing with Sunderland the opportunities which may arise from the new Industry Bill?

:I am very willing to arrange any discussions which may be helpful. I am sure that the right hon. Gentleman has derived satisfaction from the fact that in the past two months the unemployment figure in Sunderland has dropped by nearly 1,000.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent official discussions he has had with petrol companies operating in the United Kingdom on matters of mutual concern.

I and my colleagues keep in close touch with the oil industry.

I am very pleased to hear that remark, but could the hon. Gentleman say whether that at this last meeting any discussion took place as to the conditions which are imposed by petrol companies on the purchase and sale of petrol and the conditions which they impose on garage proprietors? While I am certain they present difficulties to proprietors, they are certainly a disadvantage to the consumers, because motorists have to pay a much higher price for their petrol than otherwise they would need to pay. Could he say whether any discussion took place on this point?

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that this has been the subject of a Monopolies Commission report and of discussions from time to time. The matter is being kept under close watch by the Government

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many complaints were received by his Department about the noise made by Concorde 002 when it landed at London Airport on Saturday, 1st July

Up to Friday, 7th July, 25 complaints were received in the Department. I understand that 522 complaints were received in the Southern Divisional Office of the Civil Aviation Authority and 114 by the British Airports Authority. Over 70 per cent. of those were on cards distributed before the aircraft returned to this country on 1st July by the Anti-Concorde Project. Thirty-two messages of congratulation were received and I believe that nearly all the several thousand visitors to Heathrow did so out of pride in the aircraft.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware, whether or not the protests were organised in the way he alleged, that the fact remains that a large number of people living in West London under the glide path of London Airport, some of whom I have visited and talked to, were scared out of their wits by the noise on that occasion and some were convinced that something was about to crash? Will he reaffirm the answer which his hon. Friend gave to me on 8th May that when Concorde comes into operation the noise it makes will be about the same as that of the 707 and VC10?

I can confirm that the manufacturers will be entering into contracts that provide for the noise levels of Concorde to be similar to those of the 707, DC8 and VC10 now using international airports. May I take advantage of the hon. Gentleman's Question to make it clear that while I have not the slightest doubt that a large number of letters were organised by the anti-Concorde project, that is by no means all picture. There were undoubtedly a number of people who wrote to me because they realised that this was a noisy aircraft and they wanted me to understand that this was a genuine personal point. They wanted me to read their letters, which I have done. I am fully sympathetic with that view, which I fully understand. I had to take a decision whether to bring Concorde back to Heathrow—realising that this was not the engine which would be used when the aircraft went into service—and thereby enabling a real tribute to be paid, which the overwhelming majority of people wanted to pay, to the people who had made the Concorde tour such a success.

We are grateful for what the hon. Gentleman said about the difference between the present engine and the engine that will be in the aircraft on entry to service. Is the hon. Gentleman aware that I hope that he will not give any impression—he did not do so in hisanswer—that the Government are unconscious of the noise problem but that, on the contrary, they realise that even those who organise protests about noise do reflect a body of opinion? Is he further aware that we have a difficult balance to keep here and. if I may say so, that the Government are keeping it well? Does he realise that I hope that in promoting this aircraft, in which a great investment has been made, we shall all be highly conscious of the fact that environmental standards in peoples' minds are rightly and properly rising?

I am sure that I have a responsibility to ensure that there is a balance between real growth in airport use and environmental considerations. Equally, I have to take into account that certain of the postcards from the anti-Concorde project complaining about noise were posted before the aircraft had reached Heathrow.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement about the European Space Conference on llth–12th July, with particular reference to possible British participation in the American post-Apollo programme.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what recent discussions he has had concerning United Kingdom participation in the American post-Apollo; and if he will make a statement.

Member countries of the European Space Conference decided on 6th July that the implications of the revised offer by the United States of participation in the post-Apollo programme required further detailed study. The proposed meeting on 11th–12th July was therefore postponed until September. Discussions with our European partners are currently taking place.

Has the hon. Gentleman's attention been drawn to a statement in today's issue of Aviation Week which says:

" In London, officials close to the project tend to agree with Frutkin"

"that 'there has been constant procrastination on decision-making at all levels'."

I must confess that there are certain of my predecessors in some distant Government, not long ago, in fact, whose sins I could never explain in any circumstances. It is true so say that this is a very difficult decision for Europe to make. There are a large number of wide issues involved and Europe rightly wants to give them careful consideration from a political and technological point of view. This we are doing, and the Americans fully under stand our position. That is why they have been able to extend—

What makes the hon. Member think that?

The answer to that sedentary question is that the Americans fully understand the situation and that is why they have enabled us to put off the decision, until the autumn, in this way.

Will my hon. Friend not agree that unless something is done before long to improve decision-making on this sort of project within this country and Europe, the decision on possible participation will be taken by default and we shall still be discussing the project as the Americans launch it into the air?

:This is a problem facing the Government and the European Governments. I hope, on the specific application to which the question draws attention, that we shall not let the decision go by default.

What is the new deadline for decision?

The Americans have talked to us in terms of September-October.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is his estimate of export earnings arising from sales by Rolls-Royce (1971) Limited of RB211 engines, spares and services during each of the years from 1972 to 1976.

I understand that Rolls-Royce (1971) Ltd. expect these to amount to about £65 million this year, about £80 million next year and about £100 million in each of the following three years.

While those figures for exports of the Rolls-Royce RB211 engines are most encouraging, may I ask my hon. Friend whether he does not agree that the export potential would be even greater if only we could get a decision on the finance required for a stretched version, since foreign airlines would no longer hesitate in ordering the TriStar plus the stretched version, and this would secure export orders for a long time to come?

I am aware of the interest in the decision of BAB in respect of the TriStar and the decision on any possible uprating of the RB211 engine. My hon. Friend will be aware of the statement I made recently that I hoped to reach a decision on both these matters within a few weeks.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that an order for TriStar by BEA would have an encouraging effect upon other international airlines and would help the export position?

I am fully aware of the ramifications of the BAB order.

Can the hon. Gentleman tell us, as he has been able to give us this estimate, what is his estimate of the return to the Exchequer and the public from the Government intervention giving this investment to the company?

The hon. Member will know better than most that the figures I gave were gross sales figures and that they have relatively little to do with return on investment.

What is the answer?

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will publish in the Official Report the reply which he sent to the letter which he received on 5th June, 1972, from the Society for the Control and Registration of Estate Agents and Mortgage Brokers.

My noble Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Trade wrote to the Society, offering to meet it to discuss the issues raised in its letter to me. I should have no objection if it wished to publish this correspondence, but the OFFICIAL REPORT is not the place for it.

:While thanking the right hon. Gentleman for that reply, may I ask him whether he is aware that his answer to a similar question posed by me three weeks ago to the effect that there were fewer cases of dishonesty by estate agents and mortgage brokers reported to him recently than in the past is a totally unsatisfactory way of approaching this problem? Is he further aware that many reliable and honest firms of estate agents and mortgage brokers are anxious to get their house set in order and to establish legislation whereby they are required, just as solicitors, to keep clients' accounts and to have a professional body to which they can be answerable?

I am aware that there are still problems. It is surely relevant whether the number of complaints on matters of this sort are large or small. In my earlier reply I said that there were very few complaints, and the same is true today. As for mortgage brokers, I think the hon. Gentleman knows that the Gov- ernment are considering a recommendation of the Crowther Committee that all granters of credit should be licensed.

How much longer shall we have to wait for a decision? Is the Minister aware that the whole question was the subject of draft legislation as long ago as 1966 but that the legislation was suspended on the basis that the trade itself would organise a voluntary registration system and that that system has been a failure? Is it not about time that action was taken to legislate without waiting any longer?

I do not entirely accept that the voluntary system has been a failure. It has enormously reduced the number of complaints which have been received.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will now refer the Grand Metropolitan-Watney merger to the Monopolies Commission.

I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade to the hon. Member for Newark (Mr. Bishop) on 6th July.—[Vol. 840, c. 223.]

Whatever the rights and wrongs of that decision—and it will certainly cause astonishment in the licensing trade—will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that he will closely watch the position of the thousands of publicans involved? Will he make it clear to Grand Metropolitan that if the merger goes through he will not stand idly by while the policy of Watney Mann is continued of kicking out hundreds of tenants and replacing them with managers solely for the benefit of profits?

The whole area is constantly under consideration by the Government. The position of this strengthened brewing group does not constitute any new effective monopoly, as the hon. Gentleman knows. I will certainly watch the matter.

Does not the right hon. Gentleman recognise that there is a growing feeling, not confined to one side of the House, that to consider mergers of this kind without any requirement to take account of the people whose lives will be affected—my hon. Friend has mentioned one group of people, and there are many others—is increasingly being seen as totally unsatisfactory? Failure to take into account the interests of those involved may well be a recipe for failure, even in that limited range of criteria. Will the right hon. Gentleman look again at the possibility of ensuring that those who work in firms or industries in which mergers are proposed have their views sought and put before the panel or the Commission before a final decision is reached?

How the Commission operates under the terms of our reference to it is prescribed by Statute and determined by the Commission itself. The right hon. Gentleman reproached me for inadequate concern about consumer interests and forgetting the people involved. Those interests also have to receive a large degree of consideration—a degree for which the Labour Government did not adequately provide.

Does the right hon. Gentleman remember that when I recently drew an analogy between his decision not to refer and then to refer a certain drugs merger to the Monopolies Commission and contributions to the Conservative Party, he described that as an insolent suggestion? Would he similarly describe a suggestion that his decision not to refer the Watney merger to the Commission has anything to do with the fact that Watney refused to contribute to the Conservative Party this year?

The hon. Gentleman is working up for himself a monopoly in insolent suggestions, is he not?

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now introduce amending legislation concerning the exploitation of North Sea gas and oil.

No, Sir.

Does not the hon. Gentleman recognise that there has been a dramatic change in oil and gas exploration since the original legislation in 1964 and that the royalties that will accrue to the British Government and therefore to the British people will be less than those accruing to most other oil-producing countries? Is he aware that Scotland is in grave danger of not getting the benefit from its own natural resources to which it is entitled?

The hon. Gentleman is not right in saying that the royalties that will accrue are less than those in all other countries. A variety of royalties is fixed and a variety of terms is put forward. One of the most material factors in granting licences in the last round was the contribution that the successful applicants would make to the United Kingdom economy. That I believe to be an important factor which the hon. Gentleman would support.

Does not the Minister agree that the major issue with North Sea oil is to ensure that British and Scottish firms make a substantial contribution towards the hundreds of millions of pounds worth of materials required by oil firms, bearing in mind that many of the contracts which should be going to British industry are going not only to American but to Dutch and French firms whose industries were built up by Government support? Will he look at the possibility of giving development contracts to British firms so that they can acquire the expertise needed for off-shore industry?

It is for that reason that I stressed in replying to the hon. Member for Fife, West (Mr. William Hamilton) that one of the criteria in the last round of licensing was the contribution that applicants would make to the United Kingdom economy. I am sure the hon. Gentleman will be aware of what has been done by the Government in introducing consultants, in promoting the Standing Conference on North Sea Oil and in other matters to ensure that industry in Scotland and the United Kingdom is able to take full advantage of the opportunities being provided for it.

:Is my hon. Friend aware that the royalties payable are comparable to those in the Middle East and also that the oil companies, Shell and Esso, pay extremely large amounts of taxation in the United Kingdom?

I am obliged to my hon. Friend. He is absolutely correct on both those matters. It must not be overlooked that the companies have already invested about £300 million in exploration, and that there is probably another £1,500 million or £1,700 million to be found.

Is it not about time that we began to maximise the national interest in this vital area of the North Sea? Is any study being made of what is taking place and of the action of the Norwegians in this vital area of their economy? Are there not many lessons Britain can learn from Norway in this matter?

We are watching carefully what is being done in other countries. Policy is kept under review and all the relevant factors are being taken into account. The pattern changes, and it is our responsibility to be aware of those changes and to anticipate them.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he proposes to continue after 1st January, 1973 import quotas on cotton yarn imported into the United Kingdom from areas outside the European Economic Community.

I have nothing to add to the answers given by my right hon. Friend the Minister for Trade to the hon. Member for Heywood and Royton (Mr. Joel Barnett) on 1st May and to the hon. Member for Oldham, East (Mr. James Lamond) on 21st April.—[Vol. 836, c. 17; Vol. 835, c. 171.]

As most of the EEC countries shut out yarn imports by underhand methods, will not the abolition of the quota here concentrate cheap imports on this country? In these circumstances are the Government taking no further action to support the spinning industry?

The right hon. Gentleman can rest assured that the Government will continue to be very much concerned with the success of the industry and will not lightly abandon their interests. The right hon. Gentleman need have no fear whatever on the subject. The evidence is to be seen in what the Government have done in the last year or so. The right hon. Gentleman has made allegations about Community countries. If he has a particular instance which he can cite I shall be grateful if he will let me know. Vague charges are difficult to follow up.

I thank my right hon. Friend for the assurance he has given of his deep and continuing concern for the industry. Will he accept that evidence can be found—and I shall be delighted to produce it for him—to show the way in which Continental textile industries take the law into their own hands? I earnestly hope that my right hon. Friend will continue to assure the industry of his support on every possible occasion.

What I have already said should be a strong reassurance and I will certainly repeat that as required. Any evidence which my hon. Friend can give me will be equally appreciated because, as I say, trying to base cases on vague charges is never easy.

Is it not surprising that the right hon. Gentleman should have to be told of the methods used by EEC countries to keep out cotton yarn when many of his hon. Friends are able to demonstrate that this is so and when the textile industry is so alarmed that it has sent deputations to EEC countries to discover how it is done? Is not this a job that his Department should be doing if the right hon. Gentleman means what he says about protecting the industry and does not support the Prime Minister's view, recently stated in a letter, that he is prepared to write the industry off?

I absolutely refute the hon. Gentleman's last statement, which is incorrect. Concerning his former questions, I have a very considerable compendium of knowledge about methods alleged against other countries in their handling of this problem. When it comes to the hard facts and having to cite them, though, people are much more hesitant to do so, and that is what I am seeking from the House.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions he has had with British shipbuilders about the possible effect upon British trade of the cartel-type arrangement recently negotiated between Japanese and European shipbuilders; and if he will make a statement.

I understand that a number of British shipbuilders are having discussions with their European counterparts about a proposed agreement between certain Japanese and EEC shipbuilding firms. I am not aware that any agreement has been concluded.

Would my right hon. Friend agree that there is a vast overcapacity in the building of very large crude carriers and would he accept that a certain amount of exchange of information on the subject would help to rationalise the position? Would he further accept that the elimination of shipbuilding subsidies by Governments would be the best solution ultimately?

As I said, the Government will keep very closely in touch with those British shipbuilding concerns which are having discussions currently with their European opposite numbers. Concerning the abatement of support to the shipbuilding industry, my hon. Friend is aware that this matter is currently under discussion and negotiation in the OECD.

Would it not give a considerable fillip to the British shipbuilding industry if the Government made a decision on representations made to them by the Chamber of Shipping and the British Shipbuilders Federation about a scheme of incentives to British ship-owners to place orders in British shipyards? When shall we have an announcement about that?

This matter is under careful consideration, but the proposals put forward by the shipping industry, in concert with the shipbuilding industry, clearly present problems. Great help has been given and is being given to the shipbuilding industry, as the hon. Gentleman knows. Therefore, any further assistance has to be seen in the context of what general assistance can be given. But I am very interested in the proposals made to me and I shall certainly respond to them shortly.

Will my right hon. Friend make a statement today in answer to Question No. 30? Is he aware that all of us concerned about shipbuilding and shipping have an interest in what he will say? As it has taken a very long time to approach Question No. 30, will my right hon. Friend make a statement? During the Committee stage of the Industry Bill recently, my right hon. Friend's junior Ministers did not seem to be as interested in helping shipbuilding and shipping as most of us who represent the affected areas would like. Will my right hon. Friend make a statement on Question No. 30 at the end of Question time?

Hesitant as I am, and fearful to engage in controversy with my hon. Friend—

I like controversy.

—I consider that my right hon. Friend, on the contrary, has shown throughout the utmost concern in trying to support shipping and the shipbuilding industry. I could not, on that account, undertake to make a separate statement on the question, when the originator of the Question—if my eyes do not fail me—is not present in the Chamber

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he is now able to state what the prospects are for the holders of workers' shares in the old Rolls Royce Company.

I have nothing to add to the statement by my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Trade and Industry in the Adjournment debate on 17th April.—[Vol. 835. c 194–6.]

Is not the Minister aware that many holders of workers' shares are retired staff who not only gave a lifetime of service to Rolls Royce but invested their life savings as well? Surely the Government can look again at this very human problem and try to find some way of compensating these people?

I fully sympathise with the very deep feelings of the hon. Gentleman and, I am sure, any of those who worked for the company for a lifetime. But the fact of the matter is that it is impossible to devise a scheme which distinguishes between one group of shareholders and another. This is the view we expressed in the Adjournment debate. and I am afraid that no way round it has been found subsequently.

As any compensation to shareholders must depend to a large extent on the value placed by the independent assessor on the assets taken over by the Government, should not the independent assessor's investigations be held publicly? As the new company has been trading for 18 months, when can we expect the first profit figures?

If my hon. Friend cares to table a Question about that, I shall deal with it as soon as possible. But I am delighted that we have been able to go ahead with the appointment of the expert, so that the negotiations about the valuation can proceed as fast as possible.

As the Government have made a notable exception in underwriting the engine to the end of its life in respect of its work with the Lockheed Tristar, and as the people involved had worked with Rolls Royce over a very long period and were not simply investors, would it not be possible for the Government to single out this group and to make some special provision to meet their needs in some category totally different from that of ordinary investors

Again, I can only say that this is a matter at which we have looked very carefully, and there are various anomalies with which one is confronted—people who have disposed of their shares, and people who have bought shares at lower prices—which make it very difficult to see a way out of this very difficult situation. The only other area that merits further consideration is the difficulty that arises as a result of the locked-in position that developed in respect of the workers' shares, and this is a matter which perhaps, when a suitable occasion arose, could be considered for legislative change.