asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will make a statement about progress in administering financial assistance to the machine tool industry by his Department.

All orders under the special scheme for public sector purchasing of machine tools have been placed.

How much of this money has gone to the machine tool firm of Alfred Herbert in Coventry? How much has been spent on imported machine tools? Since this is taxpayers' money, intended to help the British industry, is it not a ridiculous practice to spend the money on imports?

Less than 1 per cent. has been spent on imported machine tools. I am afraid that I could not, without notice, give the proportion of the total which has been spent at Alfred Herbert's.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that the orders for machine tools in this country have risen dramatically during the last few months and that one of my constituents who has recently placed an order has had to wait three times as long as he would have done if he had placed it a couple of months ago?

My hon. Friend is right to say that there has been a substantial increase in orders for machine tools in the third quarter of the year, but it would still be the case that there is substantial spare capacity in the majority of firms.

On the broader question, may I ask when the Minister will be commenting on the general investment outlook, in view of the forecasts for 1973 which are now well below the earlier forecasts? There is an obvious crisis of confidence and a general anxiety. Will the Government now be making an authoritative statement on investment prospects, including those for machine tools?

We had a debate about investment before the recess. All the indications are still of a substantial upturn in investment during this year.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will ban night jet charter flights after 1973.

No, Sir.

Will my hon. Friend recognise the extreme hardship of those who have to live beneath the flight paths and who are kept awake night after night by these night jet charter flights? Will he offset this against the quite small increase in fares which would result from a ban on night jet charter flights?

I am well aware that this disturbance at night causes hardship to a number of people, and my hon. Friend represents their case very powerfully. But I cannot believe that the step which he advocates would he justified when he remembers that this section of the industry carries 10 million passengers a year from United Kingdom airports and that it would cause grave damage to a large number of people if a total ban were placed on one-third of their potential operating time.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the sharp reduction in the number of night jet take-offs from Heathrow, introduced for the first time in the summer season of 1972, has been warmly welcomed by communities living around Heathrow but that many people still think there are too many night jet takeoffs? Will my hon. Friend try to enforce this virtual ban more stringently in the summer season of 1973?

I note what my hon. Friends says. The hon. Member for Putney (Mr. Hugh Jenkins) has a later Question on this point and I do not think that I should seek to anticipate my reply to it.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make an early official visit to Yorkshire and Humberside to discuss the changing industrial infrastructure and the need for improving communications, including the development of a regional airport.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make an early official visit to the Yorkshire and Humberside region to discuss the effects on the region's industry of the suggested development of a regional airport.

I have discussed these matters on a number of visits to the region as has my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State. We shall both have early opportunities to do so again. The advantages to industry of the region's good road and rail communications and ready access to the EEC will be further improved by the new east-west road. As the House knows, a study of the airport needs of the North of England, including Yorkshire and Humberside, is being initiated by the Civil Aviation Authority, which would welcome advice from hon. Members.

There is a need for an urgent decision on the future of the Yorkshire regional airport. As the Minister knows, we have only Yeadon. North-East Airlines is the main user; it intends to phase out its Viscounts from 1975 and its Trident replacements will not be able to land on the shortened runway. All this is at the time when we are entering the EEC and it will embarrass trade and stifle tourism in the county. Even if we decide to build a new airport, it will take 10 years to do it. Is there not an urgent need now for the Minister, who is responsible for regional development, to try to get the runway extended at Yeadon so that we can have an airport between 1975 and 1983, which is the earliest the new one might be built?

The right hon. Gentleman will know that the local authorities concerned have been considering whether they would wish to reapply for an extension of that runway. While Yorkshire West Riding and Bradford Council were in favour of doing so, I understand that, at the instigation of the Labour group, Leeds Council was opposed to an extension of the runway. The Civil Aviation Authority intends to make haste with this study and hopes that it will be ready by the end of the year.

Given that a new regional airport for Yorkshire and Humberside would stimulate industrial development, and given the Government's policy of assistance to the regions, are they prepared to help finance the construction of such an airport?

I should require notice of that. It is obviously not primarily a matter for me. But the hon. Gentleman will recognise that, important though the airport is, the developments of communications in the region to which we are already committed will substantially enhance its attractions for industry.

In discussion of regional development matters in the West Riding textile district, will my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and his Ministers bring to the attention of the Leeds Corporation, the only body which has not supported the extension of Yeadon runway, the vital necessity of good air communications for the exporting industries of the area and the fact that alternative sites, such as those in the Finningley area and in the Vale of York, are precluded from development by the flying training requirements of the Royal Air Force in those areas?

I take note of my hon. Friend's comments. I am sure that the Civil Aviation Authority will also do so. Lord Boyd-Carpenter has specifically said that he would welcome the views of hon. Members at an early stage.

On the assumption that Yeadon does not get its runway extension, does not the Minister agree that we shall have a terrible situation in about three years' time in that there will he no commercial airport in the whole of Yorkshire? Is not that a terrible situation? What is the Minister proposing to do to speed up the introduction of a new regional airport for Yorkshire?

There is a job to be done in looking at the airport needs of the north of England as a whole. With the development of new motorways, it is clear that some of the airport traffic from Yorkshire will be diverted to existing airports. None the less there is a strong case, which has been powerfully made by a number of bodies, for an airport at Yeadon. I believe, therefore, that it is right that the Civil Aviation Authority should undertake this study.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will visit Yorkshire and Humberside to discuss the modernisation needs of industry.

My right hon. Friend the Minister for Industrial Development has visited Yorkshire and Humberside on several occasions during the past few months to discuss the needs of industry in the region, and I shall be visiting Yorkshire and Humberside in the months to come. The provisions in the Industry Act to assist modernisation are an important part of our regional policy.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there are two pressing reasons for an even earlier visit? One is the ambiguities that appear to arise from the statement given to the Press by his right hon. Friend in Manchester on 24th November in which he appeared to interpret the Act in a much narrower sense. The second is, as I think the right hon. Gentleman appreciates, the urgent need to rehouse much of industry in the Yorkshire region, notably in the South Yorkshire and Pennines area.

Both my right hon. Friend and I agree that there is considerable potential for the application of this Act to Yorkshire, and we shall be working to this end.

In addition, will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the suggestion put forward by his colleague in the debate on Yorkshire economic development some months ago—that all development must come from within existing firms in the Yorkshire area and that there should be no great influx of industry from outside—is wholly unacceptable to opinion in Yorkshire and that this has been proved at various conferences recently. Will he give an assurance to the House and to the county that there will be full Government support for additional industries to come to Yorkshire, particularly in replacement of jobs that might be lost?

The hon. Gentleman's remarks are a misinterpretation of my right hon. Friend's speech. Certainly our objective is to do everything possible to encourage industrial expansion in Yorkshire.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell the House what is the purpose of his visit, whom he intends to meet and whether he will have talks on the expansion of Yeadon airport?

When I have completed the programme I will let the right hon. Gentleman know.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will now visit the West Riding wool textile district to discuss the importance of local air transport services for trade and industry in the region.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions he is having regarding the development of a regional airport in the Yorkshire and Humberside region, and its effects on the industry of the region.

My right hon. Friend the Minister for Industrial Development visited the wool textile industry in West Yorkshire on 9th November. Among the matters discussed was the importance of efficient air services. As I think the House may now know, the Civil Aviation Authority is about to start a study into the structure of the airport system in the North of England, including Yorkshire and Humberside.

In the Secretary of State's forthcoming tour of Yorkshire and Humberside, will he visit the wool textile delegation and the Bradford Chamber of Commerce to hear their views on the importance of maintaining an air service from Yeadon, which will be possible only if Yeadon has a sufficiently long runway? Will he also bear in mind that nobody has yet explained who will finance the development of a completely new airport ab initio elsewhere?

I am sure my right hon. Friend will have taken due note of the first point made by my hon. Friend. In reply to his second point, I must say that the criteria governing grants for airport development are strict and I am not able to hold out any prospect of financial assistance being available for airport development in Yorkshire. Any case that is put forward will be carefully considered.

Does the Minister agree that it would be undesirable for regions such as Yorkshire and Humberside, which contains the urban area of the West Yorkshire metropolitan county, to lose scheduled air services?

I am sure that the Civil Aviation Authority, which has a direct responsibility in these matters, will take note of that point. If any hon. Member on either side of the House has a point of view to put forward on this subject, I am sure that Lord Boyd-Carpenter will be happy to hear from him.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will take steps to ensure greater accuracy in the statistics relating to North Sea oil production.

I am satisfied that estimates of future production are the best that can be calculated from current information. They will be updated as more information becomes available. Actual production will be stated in the annual report to Parliament.

Is the Minister aware that there is a constant and almost universal suspicion that the Government and the oil companies are deliberately under-estimating the enormous potential of these natural resources? The Minister in the other place recently announced a miscalculation as to public participation in this effort of about 50 per cent. Why should that error be corrected in another place rather than in this House? Will the Minister undertake to ensure that there is an increasing element of public participation and that we get more realistic estimates of the potential than we have had hitherto?

I suggest that the hon. Gentleman's criticism might be better directed to his right hon. Friend the Leader of the Opposition who gave, in a speech on Saturday, more misleading statistics about North Sea oil than anything previously published. With regard to specific percentages, the hon. Gentleman will be aware that what matters is the share of the oil reserves and that in those the British participation is great, much greater than the hon. Gentleman has represented. Indeed, the British participation in the forecast of the reserves and the four fields that have been proved commercially is 58 per cent. The hon. Gentleman should not be misled by such statements as what his right hon. Friend said about the action that the Opposition had taken, which was completely misleading.

Notwithstanding the strictures put upon indigenous oil production by the Leader of the Opposition so mistakenly on Saturday, will not my hon. Friend understand that the two principal sources of fuel production in this country are coal and oil and that we ought to have in the House of Commons a statement comparable to the synopsis of weekly coal production in the context of the oil industry, so that we can all tell, week by week and month by month, what progress indigenous oil production is making?

Yes, Sir, I understand my hon. Friend's point. I think lie will agree that we have made considerable progress. The annual report to Parliament published the other day is a step in the right direction, because we believe that Parliament should be given as much information on this as practicable.

In the light of the hon. Gentleman's last comment, is it not time that we had much fuller information made available to Parliament and a full-scale debate rather than a Press conference during the recess? There was no reason for the Press conference to be given before the House returned. The information could have been given in the House. As the Minister in the House of Lords, no doubt inadvertently, made a grave error in the account he gave to my noble Friend in answering his question, is there not now a case for a much wider disclosure and a fuller debate in the House of Commons?

The right hon. Gentleman will be aware of the pressure there was that the information which became available from the International Manage- ment and Engineering Group report should be published as soon as possible in order that industry could move on it, and this action was taken.

Will my hon. Friend say whether the Leader of the Opposition was correct in saying that the Labour Government would have required a 50 per cent. participation in both the North Sea and the Irish Sea?

No, the Leader of the Opposition was again short on facts.

How do you know?

Instead of insisting, as the right lion. Gentleman claimed on Saturday, that they would require a 50 per cent. participation, they required sonic participation only in the Irish Sea and they made no requirement for public participation in the North Sea.

The hon. Gentleman must get his facts correct. I was responsible for the licences in 1969–70. If the hon. Gentleman reads the record aright he will see that we intended in the northern sectors of the North Sea to expand all nationalised industries' interests and, secondly, that in the Irish Sea no private interest at all would be allowed unless there was a 50 per cent. interest by public industries.

The right hon. Gentleman said that that was his Government's intention, but in practice they made no such requirement with regard to the North Sea, and in the case of the Irish Sea, where they required a 50 per cent. participation, the result was that only eight applications were received.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what reaction he has received from industrialists to the report of International Management and Engineering Group on the market for goods and services required for the exploitation of North Sea oil and gas.

As the report was published on 16th January, I have not as yet received a wide range of comments from industrialists.

Does the Minister support the IMEG recommendation that British industry's share in the United Kingdom offshore market should be increased from 25–30 per cent. to about 70 per cent.? Is he aware of the dismay in Scotland resulting from his decision not to establish an independent member for Scotland to sponsor the North Sea oil industry? Is he further aware that there is a feeling that under the present Government Scotland has no chance of maintaining its fair share of new jobs and investment arising from the exploitation of North Sea oil and gas?

Compared with the complete inaction of the previous Government in this respect, I am surprised at those comments. I want to see 70 per cent. and above if possible of the investment programme in the North Sea oil industry placed with firms in this country. We shall use the Industry Act. The creation of the new petroleum office in Glasgow will play a very important part, as the new office in my Department will play an important part nationwide.

What proportion of the allocation of licences in the North Sea made by the present Government in the last round went to the public sector? Can my right hon. Friend compare that proportion with the proportion which went to the public sector in the last round under the previous Government?

In the last round, 34 per cent. went to British interests, 9·6 of which went to the public sector. As to the last round of the Labour Government, I find the remarks of the right hon. Member for Barnsley (Mr. Mason) rather surprising. In the round which was completed 10 days before polling day, rather than on the basis of fifty-fifty, 80 per cent. was with the private sector and 64 per cent. of it was with foreign interests.

Is it not a fact that the Industrial Expansion Act was repealed by the present Government, thus denying them an instrument by which support could have been given to British industry in the two years before their own Act was introduced? Can the right hon. Gentleman say how much money is now budgeted for in his own forward forecast under his Industry Act?

This depends upon the range of opportunities. The Industry Act of the present Government is a far better instrument to help than the legislation of the previous Government, and will be used as such. The last Government did not even go to the point of having a report on the potentialities involved.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proposals he has for early discussions with both sides of industry in Scotland regarding the implementation of the International Management and Engineering Group Report.

Ministers from the Department will be having a number of discussions with both sides of industry over the coming months. The first should take place on 9th February.

Will the Minister make clear to the industrialist Press the disparity in the estimate produced by IMEG of 150 million tons and the Government's estimate of 75 million tons? Before undertaking discussions will he produce a statement to the House showing how he will finance the high-risk protect spoken about in the Press release? Will he make clear that industry not only in Scotland but in the rest of the United Kingdom will get a fair chance to bid for all contracts in the North Sea?

Any discrepancies between IMEG and the Government on future estimates are not of the proportion the hon. Gentleman has stated. He is using different dates. The only difference is purely a matter of timing. On the best information available to as with the finds so far discovered, this is the volume of oil which can be obtained by 1980. There is no dispute between us and IMEG other than on the question of timing in terms of extraction.

Will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the action following the IMEG report has been well received but that in practical terms there is considerable concern? Is he aware that when firms in my constituency have approached companies involved in the exploration of oil and gas, they have not been able to get anywhere near the decision-making areas, nor have they been able to break through the accepted lists of suppliers? Does not the right hon. Gentleman agree that further Government intervention would be desirable?

That is why I am setting up a special office to see that the maximum contact is made between British industry and the oil producers to exploit this market to the full. If the hon. Gentleman wishes to send me details of any examples in his constituency, I shall see that they are looked into.

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

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is now his estimate of the productive capacity of the British Steel Corporation in 1975 and in 1980.

The British Steel Corporation modernisation programme which I announced on 21st December is a flexible programme which could take the corporation's capacity to about 29 million tonnes of liquid steel by 1975, to 33 million to 35 million tonnes by the late 1970s and 36 million to 38 million tonnes in the first half of the 1980s. Together with the private sector this would mean a national capacity of some 39 million to 42 million tonnes in the first half of the 1980s.—[Vol. 848, c. 1576–8.]

Is the Secretary of State aware that his recent statement appeared to be excessively vague about the future of the profitable Sheffield and Rotherham areas? Is he aware that in those areas there is considerable suspicion that although capacity may increase, the number of jobs which will disappear will be somewhat more than he appeared to suggest in his recent statement? We need to know a great deal more about the future of those areas. Will the right hon. Gentleman come to the House as soon as possible to give detailed information and allay the suspicion he has created?

I hope that during the first week of February a White Paper will be published giving more information.

Has there not been yet another massive U-turn in the Government's thinking on steel, as they referred in their announcement early last year to the bottom end of the scale as 28 million to 36 million tonnes? Had there not been a change of thinking, would the Minister seriously dispute that we would be faced with massive imports before the end of the present decade?

No. I believe that any imports we are faced with are due to a complete lack of investment in the period 1964–70. I hope that the new investment programme will ensure that there is no need for massive imports.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will now make a statement about the employment prospects in the steel industry for the next two years.

There will be no change in the employment prospects for the steel industry in the next two years as a result of the strategy announced on 21st December. There have, prior to the strategy, been a number of closures announced which fall into this period, and on the basis of present plans by March 1975 the number of people employed in the steel industry is expected to be about 221,000 as compared with 230,000 now.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the whole of North Staffordshire is waiting anxiously to see whether the steel workers at Shelton will be allowed to exercise their great skills or whether they will be conscripted into the bloated army of the unemployed? Will the hon. Gentleman do all he can to ensure that those skills are not wasted and that the region does not become a depressed area?

The figures I have quoted for the next two years do not include Shelton since it is not expected that it will close during those two years.

When is my hon. Friend likely to be in a position to name the sites of the proposed two mini-mills which are to be established in the immediate future?

This will take some time. My right hon. Friend has said that one will be in Scotland. The site of the other will be a matter for the decision of the British Steel Corporation after further evaluation. It will be some time before that can be decided.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what estimate he has made of the percentage adjustment in the British Steel Corporation's list prices for billets, medium plates, boiler plates, beams, steel for reinforcement, hot rolled strip and hot rolled coil, respectively, which will be required to conform to the rules and practice of the European Coal and Steel Community as soon as the Counter-Inflation (Temporary Provisions) Act lapses.

The Treaty of Paris does not require producers to price their products at any particular level. My hon. Friend will see from the table I gave him in my reply of 4th December both that list prices for the same products vary from country to country and that the prices actually charged in Europe are often well below the list prices.

I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for that reply so far as it goes. Will he now tell us whether, as soon as the freeze ends, the British Steel Corporation will be allowed to increase its prices to the point at which it can earn its target 8 per cent. on capital employed or there will be a further extension of taxpayer subsidisation of prices? If so, how long will it be before we observe the rules of the European Coal and Steel Community?

We have made clear in our White Paper on stage 2 that steel prices are subject to our obligations as members of the ECSC, and Treaty of Paris products are exempt from control under stage 2. The British Steel Corporation is conscious of the need to act responsibly in the fight against inflation.

With reference to the Counter-Inflation (Temporary Provisions) Act, what progress is being made in the discussions which the Secretary of State's Department is having with the British Steel Corporation about compensating the corporation for loss of revenue during the freeze and the period of the CBI restraint?

I cannot say at this stage, but I will keep the House informed as developments take place.

During stage 2 will any increase in steel prices preserve the principle of a common uniform de- livered price for steel throughout the country, or will there be varying increases in different parts of the country as under the Common Market rules?

We have stated that we shall go over to the basis of basing points as under the Common Market rules.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will issue a directive in respect of the prices freeze enabling the wool textile industry to continue to base its own prices on the world prices of its raw materials, and taking into account the necessity of speed to maintain normal trading conditions where in some cases 87 per cent. of the cost is due to raw materials already purchased before 6th November.

In order of maintain an effective standstill on prices I believe that it is essential to require industry to absorb a significant proportion of any increases in the world price of its raw materials. We are discussing this with the wool textile industry.

When the Minister considers his view before taking part in discussions with the industry, will he recall that the industry has recently greatly increased its export earnings, that much of this is based upon quick price reaction to almost daily changes in raw materials and that, therefore, he should give more consideration to this aspect?

I shall certainly bear that in mind alongside the over-riding necessity to ensure that the standstill is effectively observed.

Does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that this is a quite exceptional case and that rises in the cost of raw materials of about 100 per cent. in the past 12 months are quite abnormal, even in an industry such as wool textiles which is highly sensitive to price fluctuations, and that as the industry, before the recent boom, experienced very low profit margins, it cannot reasonably be expected to cut back profits now?

I appreciate my hon. Friend's point about the scale of increases in world prices as a whole and I am taking that into account alongside the requirement for industry to absorb such increases in profit margins and to cooperate as far as possible in preserving the standstill.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what has been the increased productivity in colliery undertakings in relation to capital investment; and what increases there have been as a result of expansion, over the longest practical period to the nearest practical date.

As the answer contains a number of figures I will, with permission, circulate them in the OFFICIAL REPORT. They show that from January 1947 to March 1971 total capital investment, including replacement, in collieries was just under £1,500 million. Productivity rose by 105 per cent. and output declined from 185 million tons to 133 million tons.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that information. Can he, when he publishes the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT, state whether we are really getting value for the immense amount of money which is being quite rightly put into the mining industry? Is he aware that quite often productivity arises not from the contribution made by the employees but from putting in new machinery? I want to know where the balance lies. I am sure that the Government believe in obtaining value for money.

The figures in my answer will give the basic facts for which my hon. Friend has asked. I will, if I may, write to her on the subject.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that productivity in the coal mines could be increased even further if he could press the National Coal Board to sink two new pits in the East Riding of Yorkshire? Is it not a shame that men should be crawling about in less than 3 ft. of coal when they could be mining coal 6 and 7 ft. thick, thus bringing productivity to greater heights than have ever been reached before?

I will refer the hon. Gentleman's suggestion to the Chairman of the National Coal Board.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he will reintroduce investment grants for prototypes.

No, Sir. Investment grants for prototypes were part of the investment grants scheme which was terminated in October 1970 and the Government do not intend to reintroduce a grants system specifically for prototypes.

I understand that the Minister will not do so yet, at any rate. Is it not the fact that he has had representations on this issue from the Managing Director of the Drum Engineering Company of Bradford and that small firms need this additional assistance for the cost of employing high-grade designers to meet the challenge of the giants and to create new designs of machinery?

That scheme involved a long and cumbersome administrative process. There are many ways in which research and development can be helped. As the managing director of the firm which the hon. Gentleman mentioned has now been informed, help is available by means of tax allowances and I understand that the company is seeking advice on its taxation position in this respect.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many complaints have been made to the Special Prices Unit in his Department since 6th November 1972; how many of these complaints were substantiated; and what subsequent action has been taken and with what results.

The Department has received about 6,800 complaints. Half of these did not relate to the standstill. The other half have been or are being investigated. In about 2,300 cases where investigation is complete the complaint was not substantiated. In 250 cases prices were found to be above the level permitted by the standstill and in all these cases the firms concerned have reduced their prices.

As it is imperative to have the co-operation of the public in trying to minimise inflationary tendencies, does not my right hon. and learned Friend agree that it ought to be a statutory requirement that when value added tax is introduced and purchase tax and selective employment tax are abolished, any increase or decrease in the cost of goods or services should be indicated and the goods should be marked with the price so that the public may know the exact extent and scope of the new tax?

The suggestions made by my hon. Friend are amongst those borne in mind by my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer in putting forward the proposals to cover phase 2, during which value added tax will come into effect. My right hon. Friend will be making further announcements about the position in due course.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that as a result of the follow-up action by television in a report at the weekend that women's clothing manufacturers were considering introducing VAT in the middle of the freeze and raising retailers' profit margins by 10 per cent., at a meeting this morning some of the manufacturers have backed down and agreed to reduce their prices by 3½ per cent.? Can the right hon. and learned Gentleman say what action his indolent and apathetic Special Prices Unit intends to undertake to ensure that manufacturers follow this morning's example so that women who have paid illegally high prices as a result of the premature decision of the manufacturers receive a refund of the illegal surcharge? Does not this show the absurdity of the Government's decision to convert 1½ million to 2½ million firms to value added tax in the middle of a prices and incomes squeeze?

It does not demonstrate anything of the kind. I repudiate the suggestion that the Special Prices Unit can be described in the way the hon. Gentleman suggests. The fact that, in cases where prices are found to be above the level permitted, they have all been reduced by the firms concerned demonstrates the contrary. It is the effect of publicity in the context of a voluntary policy being overwhelmingly supported that is enabling us to achieve these results. As I have announced, special arrangements are to be made to ensure effective scrutiny in relation to the changeover to value added tax to ensure that the concurrent abolition of purchase tax and selective employment tax is also carried through to the advantage of the consumer wherever that should happen.

Is my right hon. and learned Friend aware that some retailers are deliberately deceiving the public already by placing in newspapers and in their shops advertisements saying "Buy now to beat VAT" on goods which will be reduced in price by the introduction of the tax? What does he intend to do about that?

That is one of the matters at which we are also looking. However, my hon. Friend ought to take account of the fact that, when we change over and abolish SET and purchase tax and replace them by VAT, some prices will be reduced alongside others which will be increased. It is important that accurate information about both changes is made available to the public at that time.

Is the right hon. and learned Gentleman aware that after the standstill his right hon. Friend the Prime Minister laid great stress on what he called the sanction of public opinion? Will he say why he will not allow the Special Prices Unit to reveal the names of the products and companies involved? Otherwise how can he convince the public and get their co-operation?

Certain changes and certain reductions are being made public. The hon. Gentleman will see them from time to time in the Press. I cannot undertake to publish the name of every company because different factors have to be taken into account in different cases

Is it not a fact that when ones conies to the incomes side trade unions are named, their claims are debated and their leaders are interrogated on television, whereas when prices rise the Government extend over the company or shop concerned the protective cloak of secrecy? Is not this one of the basic injustices in the way in which these matters are dealt with? Will the right hon. and learned Gentleman look again at the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Sheffield, Attercliffe (Mr. Duffy) that in cases of breakages on the prices side publicity should be used to discipline the offenders?

I am prepared to look at the point again. But the general provisions which are being made relate to the prices of commodities marketed by a large number of firms, and when a decision is announced it is made effective by reference to those commodities just as decisions about wage increases are made by reference to the industries concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what plans he has for improving the monitoring of price increases.

The Counter-Inflation Bill provides for the establishment of a Price Commission to monitor and regulate prices immediately after the standstill.

As the monitoring of prices is to continue on a long-term basis, is it not plain that this is a job for professionals at local level as well as at the centre? Does not this mean that the weights and measures inspectorate must be used? Will my right hon. Friend consider making funds available so that the size of that inspectorate can be expanded to take on this important task?

Because of the importance of the point made by my hon. Friend, the Counter-Inflation Bill contains provisions to enable weights and measures inspectors to monitor retail prices locally and to investigate complaints. They will operate under the direction of Ministers, and discussions with local authority associations will be held to work out detailed arrangements.

Does not the Minister realise that the weights and measures inspectorate is already overstretched in carrying out consumer protection work? How many extra staff will be needed effectively to vet the changeover by 1,500,000 firms when many millions of products have their prices changed?

The hon. Gentleman was asking us a short time ago to take steps to see that the changeover to VAT will be properly supervised, and I must tell him that our efforts are directed precisely to that end. Weights and measures inspectors will be monitoring prices and will be looking into complaints during the transitional period. In addition they will be helped by the introduction by the Government of a list of typical items to give guidance on price changes upwards or downwards which the housewife can expect to find. Large retailers will be asked for undertakings that their price changes will be in conformity with the tax changes; and the Prices Commission will have power to obtain reports about what is happening.

Will my right hon. and learned Friend give an assurance that he will keep a close eye on this matter and will watch to see that monitoring does not develop into snooping?

I take my hon. Friend's point. The White Paper on the second stage makes plain the extent to which reporting will apply to firms above a certain size. Spot checking will apply at a level below that so as to ensure that the right balance is arrived at to satisfy those who want to see that prices are kept down and those who have to carry on day-to-day trading in industry.

Which commodities will be reduced in price when VAT is introduced?

These items will be listed upwards or downwards, so that there can be no misunderstanding about them, in the guide list of typical items that the Government will bring forward.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how many members of the British Airways Board have had airline experience as pilots.

None, Sir.

I am grateful for that rather surprising answer. But is not this a disturbing omission since there is a gulf between pilots and management which has been shown in the BEA inquiry? Has my hon. Friend considered involving the chairman of the British Air Line Pilots Association as an honorary member of the board while he holds that position?

I have no evidence to suggest that the absence of a pilot from the BAB is a cause of dissatisfaction to the corporations' pilots. There are members of the boards of BEA and BOAC who are pilots of experience.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this is a problem which goes considerably wider than pilots and the Airways Board? There should be considerable thought by the Airways Board and by many other public and private boards about the need to construct careers in their organisations which will enable men with what might be called shop floor experience to serve usefully on boards of this kind and not simply as representatives who belong to trade unions.

I have some sympathy with what my hon. Friend says, especially in relation to this industry. I know that the BAB and the Chairman of the Civil Aviation Authority will be happy to explain directly to any hon. Member what is being done in this connection at the moment. I am sure that they will be happy to hear any suggestions that hon. Members have to put to them.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will make a statement on his recent discussions with the United States National Aeronautics and Space Agency.

My hon. Friend the Minister for Aerospace and Shipping and I have had discussions recently with officials of the United States National Aeronautics and Space Agency. These were general discussions covering a range of matters including the post-Apollo programme and possible opportunities for British firms arising from it.

On what date can NASA expect a "Yes" or "No" answer from the British Government about participation in the post-Apollo programme?

The hon. Gentleman is mistaken in supposing that NASA wishes to set a deadline. There is no specific deadline. The United States authorities have indicated that they would still like British participation.

Now that we have proposed a European space authority to get these decisions more quickly, might it not be helpful if we also had a British space authority to get our decisions more quickly instead of fragmentation between half a dozen different departments?

I think it would be easier to concentrate on getting one space authority working at a time. We have taken the view that we should start with the European space authority.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that concern has been expressed about the Government merely having discussions with the United States on these matters and that the industry is concerned about the lack of policy decisions. We need decisions, because the options are running out on United Kingdom/United States participation.

I do not necessarily accept that. When I was in Washington I represented to NASA that it was important to allow foreign firms with a unique contribution to make to participate in the post-Apollo programme. This question is still being considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions he has had recently with European countries regarding post-Apollo collaboration; and if he will make a statement.

As the hon. Member is no doubt aware my hon. Friend the Minister for Aerospace and Shipping attended the European Space Conference on 20th December 1972. The conference gave general approval for the sortie laboratory element of the post-Apollo programme to be carried out and managed within a common European framework. Each country was left free to decide whether it will participate and, if so, the size of its financial contribution.

Is the Minister aware that there was a great deal of procrastination by the Government last year when decisions could have been taken and that the British aircraft industry, which can make a substantial contribution in this development, is awaiting a decision from the Government on this matter? If the Minister does not take the initiative in Europe, France or another country will do so, probably to our detriment.

I cannot accept what the hon. Gentleman says. It has been generally recognised that the agreement that was achieved at this conference on the possible formation of a European space agency and rationalisation of expenditure within Europe was an important step forward which could in the long term have considerable industrial benefits.

Will my hon. Friend say whether the Government will back British participation in this project, which is surely the nub of the hon. Gentleman's Question?

Our decision on this matter must depend on the outcome of discussions on the establishment of the agency and the extent to which arrangements can be made to rationalise European expenditure. These are matters which are to be considered by a working group which is due to report on 3rd March.

At the conference, what time scale was proposed for the European space agency?

I do not think that any deadline was set, but naturally all concerned understand the need for pressing on.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made towards the opening of Maplin airport to traffic by 1980.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what is his latest estimate of when he expects the first runway of the proposed airport on Maplin Sands to become operational.

Is is our aim that Maplin airport should be operational by 1980. Action is proceeding in various fields which is would take too long to recapitulate here: but the forthcoming debate on the second reading of the Maplin Development Bill will enable the House to be given a full account of progress to date.

Bearing in mind that airport facilities in the Midlands and the North, if properly developed, could have a big impact on the requirements for air transport in the South-East and since the Civil Aviation Authority is pursuing a comprehensive review of facilities in the Midlands and the North, to reduce capacity at an airport like Luton in the South-East can surely only add to the difficulties of the civil air transport industry.

I am sure that due attention will be given to my hon. Friend's remarks, though I do not necessarily accept either of the bases on which he puts them forward.

Will my hon. Friend ensure that £1,000 million of public money is not committed to this project before he has good grounds for believing that the bird strike problems can be obviated? Is he aware that there are as yet no grounds for believing this and that, in the absence of such knowledge, this project compares unfavourably with the Charge of the Light Brigade as an economic use of resources?

I am sure that that was the last thought in the Earl of Cardigan's mind as he went down the valley. [HON. MEMBERS: "Birds?"] The economic use of resources. This is a point on which there is clearly room for disagreement, but my hon. Friend is mistaken in supposing that all the evidence necessarily lies one way. I am sure that my hon. Friend who answers from the Government Front Bench will look forward to hearing my hon. Friend's speech in the Second Reading debate.

I am glad to follow the hon. Member for Tiverton (Mr. Maxwell-Hyslop). Is the Minister aware that he and his Government might be more popular if they were to consider alternative solutions such as that now being considered by Japan in Osaka Bay for a floating airport or, alternatively, the development of an airport to serve the Midlands and the North as a third national airport in the East Midlands?

I look forward to receiving a supplementary question from the hon. Gentleman on his Question No. 29 on the latter subject if we reach it. In reply to his suggestion of a floating airport, I think we had better make up our minds to stick to Maplin.

Is it not clear that the non-airport part of the costs, such as road and rail communications and the destruction of homes, will outweigh the cost of the construction of Foulness airport? Is it not strategic planning madness to take this decision before a final decision has been made on the Channel Tunnel?

I think my hon. Friend is mistaken in believing that the decision on the airport could or should have been further postponed.

Will the hon. Gentleman tell the House what is the latest total estimated cost of the development of the airport, the adjacent facilities and the communications?

No doubt the right hon. Gentleman will be able to repeat that question in the Second Reading debate, when he will receive as accurate an answer as can be given to him at that time.

What is the answer?

The right hon. Gentleman must contain his impatience. If he is telling the House that he prefers not to take part in that debate, we shall understand his reluctance to stand up.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry whether he has completed his consideration of the matters raised at his meeting on 7th November with representatives of the Southampton ship-repair industry; and if he will make a statement.

As was announced to the House on 21st December, my Department is commissioning consultants to carry out a study of the United Kingdom ship-repair industry.—[Vol. 848, c. 446–7.]

When does the Minister expect to receive the report of that study? Is he aware of the special and immediate problems facing the ship-repair industry in Southampton, and will he ensure that any remedy his consultants suggest is not too late for Southampton?

Certainly we will ensure that no time is wasted. We shall have the report by late May or early June.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry why the Government have not yet agreed with the liquidator a purchase price for the assets of Rolls-Royce Limited.

Under the heads of agreement for the sale of the assets, the determination of the price is a matter between the receiver of Rolls-Royce Ltd. and Rolls-Royce (1971) Ltd. which have referred it to an independent expert.

I am sure that the Minister has seen Press reports that although the liquidator's asking price for assets was around £170 million, the latest offer from the company was only one quarter of that sum, too little to allow the shareholders to expect any return whatever. As we are at the second anniversary of the bankruptcy and as many creditors have not been paid, will not the Government acknowledge that the gap is so wide that the independent assessor has a task which is almost beyond him?

The hon. Gentleman has no right to draw that conclusion. The procedures which are now being followed were those agreed by all the parties to the selling of the assets, including the receiver. An independent expert has been appointed by the two sides to determine a fair price for the assets. Even though delay must involve hardship to outstanding creditors and shareholders, I cannot accept that the Government should intervene so that more than a fair price is paid. The size of the gap shows how inappropriate it would be for the Government to influence the matter.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many firms, some in my constituency, are owed money by Rolls-Royce, which they require for investment in machine tools? Cannot this process be speeded up in the interests of the economy?

There are firms which are in such a position in many constituencies throughout the country. My general experience is that they have been able to obtain assistance from banks and other sources in bridging the situation. If my hon. Friend has any cases which he wishes to draw to my attention. I shall be glad to meet him.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what progress has been made with regard to the design and feasibility study of the use of steam generating heavy water reactors by electricity generating boards in the United Kingdom and if he will make a statement.

The nuclear design and construction companies have recently made joint proposals to my Department which are being urgently examined in consultation with the Atomic Energy Authority and the electricity generating boards.

Will my hon. Friend tell the House when the decision will be taken on the considerations which are being undergone at the moment? Does he agree that in view of the undoubted success of the prototype SGHWR, it would be better to press ahead with that rather than to buy American, as some sources have suggested?

The object of the review announced on 8th August was to enable all these matters to be evaluated over the 18-month period. I hope we shall be able to keep to that target, although it will depend on the number of generating boards wishing to place an order.

Does the Minister agree that the steam generated heavy water reactor at Winfrith Heath as a prototype has been working satisfactorily for a number of years and could be used by any of the generating boards if there were the will to do so?

Yes, it has been working very satisfactorily, but the hon. Gentleman will agree that further work is needed before it can be translated into a commercial reactor.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what proposals he has for increasing financial assistance for research in the car industry.

I have no firm plans for increasing the financial assistance for specific research work in the car industry but my Department will continue to cooperate with the industry by financially supporting joint venture projects in appropriate circumstances.

As the Governments of many countries, including the United States, Japan and Sweden, seem to be using exhaust emission and safety regulations as a means of keeping British cars out of their markets, and as the British car industry makes a substantial contribution to the balance of payments, what endeavours does the Minister intend to make to help British car manufacturers to comply with these increased foreign regulations?

There have been a number of grants to joint research projects from my Department. The Department of the Environment has also stepped up its work with the Motor Industry Research Association. We shall be prepared to look at further projects by that association. I believe that that is the best way to proceed.