asked the Secretary of State for Energy what is the level of coal stocks at power stations compared with a year earlier.

Coal stocks held at power stations in Great Britain on 11th January were 13·1 million tons as compared with 13·7 million tons at the corresponding date in 1974.

I am grateful to the right not be—a cessation of coal production, copy of that reply before Question Time—no doubt inadvertently—by placing it on the board.

If there were to be a cessation of coal production it would be difficult to estimate how long Stocks would last, but I hope that there are and will be continuous harmonious industrial relations in the coal mining industry, and I know that the whole House shares that wish. Existing coal stocks at power stations are about 5 million to 6 million tons above the critical level. Undoubtedly the abnormally mild weather during December helped to balance the situation. In addition, I say a big "Thank you" not to you, Mr. Speaker, but to the Almighty for answering my prayers.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he will give a general direction to electricity boards to introduce savings stamp schemes for their consumers who would prefer to pay electricity bills in this way.

Arrangements for the payment of electricity accounts are matters for the boards themselves in consultation with their consultative councils. All boards operate some sort of easy payment scheme for consumers who find it difficult to budget for quarterly bills.

Does my hon. Friend accept that consumers on small fixed incomes who are able to pay their bills in this way find it more convenient and less embarrassing than other forms of special arrangement that might be made for them? Does he agree, therefore, that it is unfortunate that this arrangement or facility is not available to consumers throughout the country?

I note what my hon. Friend says. A number of alternative schemes are operated throughout the country—for example, the provision of monthly budget accounts, weekly or fortnightly prepayment schemes by bank or Giro standing order, agreement with the local authority to include the cost of electricity in the tenant's rent, and the provision of a prepayment meter. The discretion is entirely with the board concerned.

Does not my hon. Friend agree that any form of payment arranged for small consumers that avoids their having to pay the exorbitant rates charged by prepayment meters is preferable to the prepayment meter scheme?

My hon. Friend has raised this question repeatedly. My right hon. Friend has given the matter sympathetic consideration and will try to inform the House further. The best scheme is that which suits the tenant in relation to his income. I repeat that the discretion lies with the board concerned.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will introduce a two-tier system of petrol pricing in which there would be a basic weekly allowance of petrol at a preferential rate.

As has already been announced, a two-tier pricing system for petrol involving the use of coupons is being considered.

Cannot the Government show more urgency? Is not the Minister aware that in rural areas such as Cornwall public transport is often nonexistent and thus ownership of a motor car is necessary for essential journeys such as getting to work? Is he not also aware that in country districts the average level of earnings is below the national average and that there are a large number of people living on retirement income and other forms of fixed income? Cannot the Government help these people?

Everybody in the community has to suffer to some extent from the unavoidable increases in the price of petrol. However, we understand and appreciate the problems of people who live in rural areas. But the problem is not confined to those who live in rural areas. There are shift workers living in town, for example, who have similar problems. To look into the matter carefully we must assess how the scheme would work and what its impact would be. I assure the hon. Gentleman that we are looking carefully and urgently at the matter. In that context it is not fair to accuse us of showing a lack of urgency.

Is the Minister aware that, in addition to the points made by my hon. Friend the Member for Bodmin (Mr. Hicks), there is particular concern among the disabled in these areas, particularly where there is no form of public transport? The disabled simply cannot cut down on their mileage and they are facing very grave hardship.

We will bear all these points in mind. There is a difficulty about starting to make exceptions from a simple scheme. Once an exception is made for one category it leads to an argument about an exception for another category. I take the point about the disabled. We may be able to assist them in other ways than by reducing the price of petrol.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he is satisfied that his recently-announced measures will conserve as much oil as he has envisaged.

As my right hon. Friend made clear at the time, it is not possible to estimate with any precision the energy saving flowing from the interim package which he announced on 9th December. My right hon. Friend is satisfied that these measures can make a valuable contribution, and he intends to extend and reinforce them in future.

Is not the Minister aware that the position of rural dwellers as first highlighted by my hon. Friend the Member for Bodmin (Mr. Hicks) must be compared with the comfortable conditions of city office workers and people with oil central heating who live in a comparatively warm temperature of 68 degrees which is considered by the Government to be adequate? Will not the hon. Gentleman realise that the country faces an economic crisis because of the oil situation and that unless the Department sets an example and takes firm action we shall not save as much oil as we otherwise would?

In common with many who have criticised the Government's energy-saving campaign, the hon. Gentleman has not put forward one single constructive suggestion.

Sixty-eight degrees!

In civil offices and defence offices the Government have in hand a programme of energy conservation. The House would benefit if hon. Gentlemen, in considering the Government's proposals, while by all means criticising them, at the same time put forward constructive suggestions.

Does my hon. Friend have any figures showing the extent to which the cause of oil conservation is being supported by the inhabitants of Christchurch and Lymington? Are they backing Britain in that part of the world?

That is perhaps a question for the hon. Member for Christchurch and Lymington (Mr. Adley) to answer. There is a serious aspect to this matter. Everybody must co-operate in the energy-saving programme, and the Government are about to embark upon an extensive publicity campaign so that everybody at home and in an industrial capacity can get together to save the maximum amount of energy, which costs us so much at the moment.

While expensive publicity campaigns may be all very well, if the Government are really serious about the need to conserve energy should they not cut down the amount of lighting on motorways? It is ridiculous to have lighting the whole way from the outskirts of London to Maidenhead on the M4.

The hon. Gentleman referred to an expensive energy-saving campaign. We hope that the energy-saving campaign which we are about to promote will give value for money. If it can attract considerable savings and produce the right public spirit, it will he money well spent. The lighting of roadways involves my right hon. Friend the Minister for Transport, and there are different considerations here. We must balance road safety with energy saving.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy when he expects to announce his further proposals for energy conservation.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy when he proposes to announce additional measures to conserve energy.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what further plans he has for economising in the use of energy resources.

I am today launching a major publicity campaign to bring home to consumers the need to save energy and to explain how they can do it. I shall be bringing forward further proposals to extend and reinforce my energy-saving programme at the appropriate time.

While welcoming the Government's belated repentance after years of dilly-dallying, and the restoration of the previous Conservative Government's campaign to conserve energy by pub- licity, may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman does not agree that voluntary restraint while it is essential, will not be enough? Has he seen the excellent report just published by the National Economic Development Office which contains first-class recommendations? When shall we see real proposals in the short, medium and long term?

The hon. Gentleman has referred to the Conservative Government's "Switch Off Something" campaign. That was designed to encourage people to cut off electricity and was motivated by the industrial action at that time. The major publicity campaign on which we are embarking will be a sustained campaign and directed not only at electricity but at all forms of energy.

Will my right hon. Friend give an assurance that he will not be introducing such radical proposals as cleaning one's teeth in the dark? Will he give some kind of direction to commerce, shops and other people to stop the continuous night lighting of their premises? Does he appreciate that nobody on this side of the House accepts the philosophy of rationing energy by the purse and that if there is to be rationing it ought to be rationing physically rather than financially? Finally, can my right hon. Friend say what steps he is taking to encourage individuals and commercial concerns to improve the insulation of their premises?

I agree very much with my hon. Friend that much more can be done. Direct energy consumption under Government control represents only 1 per cent., and it depends on what can be saved in the household and in industry. With regard to rationing by the purse, I am sure my hon. Friend will also accept that rationing by coupon does not necessarily mean cheap petrol or cheap energy.

I thank the Secretary of State for the advance copies of answers to Questions before Question Time. I only wish that his Department were as prompt in saving energy as he is in sending answers before Question Time.

As I said on 9th December, the Government are not so proud as to believe that their measures are necessarily the best. This is a very complex issue. The only way to save energy dramatically is by rota cuts and rationing—in short, misery. While some of the measure advocated by the hon. Gentleman have not been ruled out, it is necessary to see how the measures which were announced last month work out and to see whether they can be reinforced. If they can be reinforced, I shall certainly reinforce them.

On 9th December my right hon. Friend referred to a study which was being carried out concerning the lead content of petrol, balancing the environment with the energy question. Can he say how the study is progressing?

The study is continuing. Work is being pressed ahead on it, and as soon as we are in a position to announce the conclusions I shall let the House know how it is going.

My hon. Friend the Member for Derbyshire, South-East (Mr. Rost) has been pressing a number of measures on the right hon. Gentleman which he might impose in the context of energy conservation. Indeed, he is to be congratulated on that. Does not the Secretary of State recognise that his announcement last month was greeted with dismay by many people on all sides of the political spectrum for its inadequacy? Will he now really get ahead? The campaign is something, but will he get ahead and examine urgently a number of the measures which my hon. Friend suggested, particularly that relating to motorway lighting, which would make a considerable public impact?

If one turned out all the street lights and all the lighting on the motorways it would save only about 1 per cent. of all the electricity generated. One has to take into consideration the safety and security aspects. The right hon. Gentleman ought to get his facts right. Certainly, as we have said on many occasions, if practicable proposals are put forward we will implement them.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he will give a general direction to the gas and electricity authorities to combine their present showroom facilities.

This idea has been examined before and found inappropriate but is now being reconsidered.

I thank the Minister for the partial encouragement in that answer, and I, too, thank him for sending me an advance copy of it in good time. Will he, however, look at the matter in the widest possible sense, because there is here the question not only of possible economy but of direct energy saving? Will the hon. Gentleman consider this proposal also in the context of the advertising being done by these two nationalised undertakings, which also can cause a serious waste of resources?

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for what he says. He will know that this question has been under examination over the past 20 years, but even in the last report no firm recommendation was made. It is fair to say that there has been resistance to any such proposal, especially from the consumers' councils, which, after all, have to be considered. They do not like showrooms to be closed, because these premises are used for other purposes—for instance, the payment of bills. However, the hon. Gentleman is quite right when he makes the point that some forms of advertising would be undesirable in today's conditions. I imagine that he and other hon. Members have noted the relevance of much current publicity for energy-saving efforts, and, as I have said, the whole matter is now being reconsidered.

Will my hon. Friend assure the House that it is not the present Government's intention to proceed with the policy of the previous Conservative Government, which was to close these publicly-owned facilities altogether?

I am glad to take this opportunity to allay my hon. Friend's fears. Any studies in relation to energy saving would certainly be motivated entirely by other considerations.

What progress has been made in combining meter readings for both gas and electricity at the same time?

This question has been considered in great depth in the past. No conclusion was reached because, from the standpoint of possible savings—I assume that that was the point of the hon. Gentleman's question—it was agreed that any saving would be very marginal, if anything at all.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he has been able to take steps to protect small consumers and poor consumers in the current round of electricity and gas price increases.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what proposals he has to help poorer consumers meet increased costs of gas and electricity.

The position of small consumers will be borne in mind when the electricity industry's price proposals are considered. In the case of gas, recent increases have been formulated so as to bear most heavily on the larger domestic consumers.

I greatly appreciate what my hon. Friend has been able to do in this matter and I am sure that small consumers will appreciate it, too, but I wonder whether the very small consumer, and especially the small consumer with a prepayment meter, slipped through his net, since it appears to me that the increase for these people has been above 30 per cent. rather than at 12 per cent. Has my hon. Friend studied the situation in Ireland where there are pensioners' rebates for energy consumption, and has he looked also at the position in Japan where a progressive tax is operated?

My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has told the House that he is carrying out an examination of this matter. I refer my hon. Friend to Hansard of 18th December, cols. 482–3. There are difficulties here. I am sure my hon. Friend will agree that the problem is easier to state than to resolve, but, as I say, it is being carefully examined.

Assurances are not enough for the small and poorer consumer. How do the Government reconcile allowing these prices to climb indiscriminately with a background of massive food subsidies, since it is these energy consumers who are hardest hit?

Assurances are valuable when they are specific, and my right hon. Friend has given an undertaking to report to the House and to make a statement on this matter. As regards energy-pricing policies, I am astonished that the hon. Gentleman should hang his hat on this aspect of the matter, because I thought there was agreement on both sides of the House that the sooner we returned to proper pricing in relation to energy the better it would be for the country.

Is my hon. Friend aware that many small and poor consumers would prefer to pay for their gas and electricity as they use them through the prepayment machines to which he referred earlier? Is he aware also that there is a long delay in the provision of these meters by the electricity and gas boards? Will he bring pressure to bear on the boards to expedite the provision of these prepayment machines?

And to reduce their prices.

I take the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, South (Mr. Marshall). The matter has come under attention from time to time. If my hon. Friend has any information regarding specific areas where there has been delay, I shall try to assist him in contacting the area board concerned, which, after all, has complete discretion in these matters.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will now set up a departmental committee to monitor the effects of price increases in fuel in rural areas which have a comparatively low average earnings level.

No, Sir. Data are already available for expenditure by households in rural areas, broken down by income ranges.

The hon. Gentleman will be aware that since I tabled the Question I have had an Adjournment debate on the subject. When does he expect the study of two-tier pricing for petrol to be complete? Is there a target date for it?

I am afraid that I cannot give a date. We are considering the matter as speedily as we can, and as soon as any conclusion is reached the House will be informed.

As we now have it confirmed that last year's rate of inflation was 19 per cent. and not the figure given by the Chancellor just before the last election, and as we know that Government taxation now represents a very significant part of the increase in petrol prices, when will the Government come forward with a firm plan to help those in rural areas for whom a car is a necessity, not a luxury?

I said in reply to the hon. Member for Bodmin (Mr. Hicks) on Question No. 4 that we cannot totally exempt people in rural areas from the effects of these price increases. The hon. Gentleman is properly concerned about our rural areas, as all hon. Members are, but I think that that concern ought to be directed on a much wider front because, as I have already said, people in urban areas are often in considerable difficulty as well. We have to look at the whole picture in devising a scheme. That is one of the complications which demand that we consider it carefully, because a half-baked scheme which did not work properly would be worse than a well considered scheme, if we decided to adopt it when our deliberations were concluded.

As Scotland is a country with many remote areas, does not the Minister think it appropriate that there should be a lower rate of petrol duty in Scotland, especially as Scotland is soon to become an oil-exporting country?

I do not think that that would be appropriate. The hon. Gentle- man should remember that long before Britain becomes an oil exporting country, and Scotland, as part of Britain, shares in that, the British taxpayer will have put a great deal into providing the infrastructure and all other things necessary to get the oil out.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he will introduce a scheme for petrol vouchers for specific groups in need in rural areas.

I have the problems of those in rural areas very much in mind, but there are others who are equally affected by the rise in petrol prices. To attempt to provide relief to special groups would be administratively difficult and costly, would be seen as discriminatory and would encourage petrol consumption at a time when the utmost economy is essential.

I recognise the need for the utmost economy, but may I reinforce the point by reminding the Minister that longer journeys are more necessary in rural areas than in most other areas, not only to and from work but for other essential purposes, and that there is simply no alternative employment or transport available? I urge the Minister to recognise that not only hardship but real damage will in many cases be caused unless he comes forward with a solution soon.

As I have already made clear, the Government are fully aware of the problems of people living in rural areas, especially among those who have to use a car to get to work. But it is difficult to isolate rural consumers from other consumers of petrol in any effective or clear way, and any solution will have to be on a more general basis which will help rural people among others.

On my hon. Friend's last point, will he consult the Chancellor of the Exchequer to see whether, since most business people enjoy tax rebates and assistance with their cars and petrol, there should be a general allowance to all income tax payers? All that would then remain would be for a special scheme to be made for pensioners and others who did not come under the tax scheme.

My hon. Friend has recognised that this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor, and I shall certainly bring it to his attention.

Does the Minister accept that a voucher system would be a rather expensive method for the motorist? Is he aware that those with company cars would derive considerable advantage? Before introducing any such scheme, will he take account of the view of the 32,000 retail outlets?

We shall consult all appropriate people with experience before we introduce any scheme. The hon. Member mentioned company cars. There is now quite a lot of feeling that some people with company cars are abusing the system by using them for personal purposes and thereby getting relief from VAT. I hope that the companies which have control over this will stop it.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what percentage of a barrel of crude oil can be made into petrol.

Taking United Kingdom refineries as a whole, this normally lies between about 10 and 15 per cent. The actual figure depends upon a number of factors including the type of crude oil, the refining processes employed and the demand for naphtha as a petrochemical feedstock.

May I offer my gratitude to the Minister for having given me the Answer first on a piece of paper—

Order. May we have a comprehensive expression of gratitude? This is the fourth time that this has happened.

Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, I am grateful and I hope that it may become standard practice. It will be very welcome.

The hon. Member is not giving a fair summary of the position. People who use oil for domestic heating have had increases which have almost doubled the price of their oil during the last year. The Chancellor has loaded the tax on to the private motorist because this is an area where economies can be made without affecting our industrial effort.

At a time when recession is clearly biting in those industries which are closely linked with the use of petrol, and since the purpose of the restrictions is to right the balance of demand, is it not worth considering whether there should be a more general onslaught on import levels and an easing of the onslaught on petrol? Is not this advisable if we are not have undue and perhaps avoidable unemployment and recession?

The hon. Gentleman's constructive approach indicates the problem of balancing conflicting considerations. An energy conservation programme which bites too deeply might affect our industrial effort and make us worse off than we were orginally. That consideration must be borne in mind by those demanding more extreme measures. I shall bear in mind what the hon. Member said, but my right hon. Friend the Chancellor was right in his judgment that in present circumstances the use of petrol by the private motorist is an area in which economies can most easily be effected.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what representations he has received from the oil extraction firms engaged in the North Sea since the Government published their proposals for oil revenue taxation and North Sea participation.

I am in continuous consultation with the oil companies about all aspects of North Sea policy.

Does the Secretary of State agree that the Government have made a grave error of judgment in not completing the consultations before presenting to Parliament the hasty and ill-prepared Oil Taxation Bill which is based on oil revenue rather than on profits? Will not the Government change their mind, admit their error and change to an excess profits tax rather than a foolhardy tax which will deter development and exploration in the North Sea?

I do not accept the hon. Gentleman's strictures. All the oil companies with interests in the 12 commercial oilfields have been seen and informed of the general lines of Government policy, and my right hon. Friend the Paymaster-General made a statement to the Standing Committee last week.

Will my right hon. Friend say whether the Paymaster-General's statement on the preservation of profits for the North Sea oil companies is compatible with the social contract and, perhaps even more important, whether it can also be reconciled with my right hon. Friend's attempt to get a large and significant slice of the £4,000 million of which he spoke before the last election?

I can give my hon. Friend an absolute assurance that we stand by the policy we outlined in our manifesto and by the policy I announced to the House in July.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that many people think that there is considerable validity in the point made by the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) and that great confusion has been caused by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster's statement that the 51 per cent. participation will not affect oil company profits? People cannot see the point of taking a 51 per cent. stake in those companies. The confusion has been compounded by the right hon. Gentleman's refusal to answer the question by the hon. Member for Bolsover—the same question as was asked from the Opposition Front Bench last week.

If there is any confusion, it is in the hon. Gentleman's mind. The companies are examining the terms that we put to them and they have promised to come back and discuss them with us further.

Since some of the oil companies have threatened to get out of the North Sea, will my right hon. Friend say whether they have indicated where else they could go on less tough terms than the Government are now suggesting?

My hon. Friend is on to a strong point. Every major oil-producing country, with the exception of the United States of America, has gone in for participation. Of course, we have always made it plain that there will be a continuing rôle for the companies in the North Sea, and far from exploration activity declining I hope to show in a later answer that it has been stepped up. There is a great deal of difference between exploration activity and development activity.

Further to the reply to the hon. Member for Fife, Central (Mr. Hamilton), may I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman is aware that the United States Government are proposing to lease 10 million acres of the outer Continental Shelf during 1975? Does he accept that he would do well to listen to some of the warnings which are now being expressed by the oil companies? Does he recognise that there is a need to come clean on the "no gain, no loss" suggestion by his right hon. Friend, and that, contrary to what he himself has said, neither the oil industry nor the Opposition know what he means or how it can be achieved?

The proposal was fully outlined in July when I made my statement to the House. The negotiations and the discussions that we are having with the companies are confidential and the House would not expect me to go into the details of them. At an appropriate stage I shall come to the House and provide the information that it requires.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy to what extent the rundown in North Sea activities is affecting the Government's programme to bring oil and gas ashore.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what are his latest estimates of North Sea oil production for the years 1975, 1976 and 1977, respectively.

Though there have been suggestions that some companies may not build up their North Sea activity to the levels originally envisaged, activity is in fact now at a higher level than ever before. I will be publishing revised figures in the annual Brown Book but my present expectation is that by 1980 oil production will be within the range of 100 million to 140 million tons, as indicated in the 1974 Brown Book.

I find the Secretary of State's answer very surprising. Is it not a fact that expected orders for production platforms are now something like 50 per cent. down on six months ago? For example, orders for non-essential equipment for the Claymore field have been delayed, and on the basis of the Government's present proposals only five or six fields in the North Sea may ever be developed.

It depends where one starts in looking at North Sea oil and North Sea exploration activity. An examination shows that the slippage which took place did so under the last Conservative Government. Mr. Tom Boardman, who was Minister for Industry at the time, announced in May 1973 that we were going to get 25 million tons of oil from the North Sea in 1975. Last March I told the House that that estimate was down. The hon. Member should know that there are now four sites in the United Kingdom for the construction of steel platforms and six for the construction of concrete designs. Three of these were announced only a few days ago by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland.

How much Scottish oil will be refined in Scottish refineries? What steps is my right hon. Friend's Department taking to increase the refinery capacity in Scotland, to refine more Scottish oil?

There is enough refinery capacity for 150 million tons of oil a year. That is plenty at present, but I can tell my hon. Friend, who I know takes a great interest in these questions, that over a time refinery capacity will be built up in that country. However, it is too early to say by how much it will be increased.

The Minister did not answer my Question, which related specifically to the years 1975, 1976 and 1977. If he cannot forecast production for this year and the next two years with some confidence, is he not deluding himself, the House and the country by sticking to a target date of 1980 for self-sufficiency in oil?

No, Sir, I am not deluding myself. The companies are operating on the edges of technology. There has been some slippage during the winter and last autumn because of the severe weather conditions. All these matters—technical problems and labour troubles—add up to difficulties, but the 1980 perspective holds good.

Is not my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh, North (Mr. Fletcher) absolutely right in that in the face of the faltering progress of our North Sea development the right hon. Gentleman is displaying complacency which is terrifying? Will he now recognise what the Government's policies are doing in creating uncertainty and doubt in an area where there should be the maximum certainty, enterprise and incentive if we are to go anywhere near achieving the target about which he has told us?

The right hon. Gentleman wants maximum surrender. The British people would not have a proper share and stake in their own oil if the matter were left to him. Ever since the present Government came into office, the right hon. Gentleman has had a vested interest in seeing that this country should fail. I hope he will get out of that soon.

rose—

Order. Question Time is not a time for debate.

On a point of order.

We will have the point of order at the end of Question Time.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. During Question Time the Secretary of State for Energy said, within the hearing of many hon. Members, that ever since the present Government took office my right hon. Friend the Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Jenkin) had had a vested interest in preventing public participation in the development of North Sea oil. The words may have been used loosely but they nevertheless have a very clear connotation in this Chamber. They reflect upon the integrity of my right hon. Friend. It was an uncharacteristic remark by the Secretary of State and it might have been but a slip of the tongue. I hope that you can afford the Secretary of State the opportunity to withdraw and to apologise to my right hon. Friend.

In my view, if it was a reference to a vested financial interest that is one thing, but if it was a question of a vested political interest it is a different thing. Perhaps the Secretary of State will clarify.

I did not in any way imply that there was a vested financial or commercial interest, Mr. Speaker, but I did imply, of course, that there was a vested political interest in the continued carping by the right hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Jenkin) at our policy.

I accept the Secretary of State's apology in the sense that it was offered. Perhaps I can, by way of further explanation, assure the right hon. Gentleman that, following a briefing from his own Department, which I was grateful to have, I spent a fair part of the last recess trying to reassure companies in Canada and the United States that wiser counsel would prevail and that they would be able to continue to operate in the North Sea.

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. Can the right hon. Member for Wanstead and Woodford (Mr. Jenkin) make it clear that it was the oil companies which paid for his journey to America?

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. If the hon. Gentleman will read the statements I made at the first and fifth sittings of the Committee's proceedings, he will see exactly what I was up to.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what was the percentage by which domestic gas prices per therm in Scotland exceeded the average price in England and Wales in the most recent annual period for which figures are available; and what were the comparable figures five and 10 years previously, respectively.

In terms of average revenue the percentages were 27 per cent. in 1973–74, and 23 per cent. and 21½ per cent., but this basis of comparison exaggerates the difference in tariffs, which has been reduced from 1st January.

Does the Minister agree that it is monstrous and totally unjust that, according to his own figures, Scottish housewives should be paying more than one-quarter more for their gas than the average housewife in England and Wales? What reduction in the differential will stem from the welcome move on 1st January? Will the hon. Gentleman say that it is the Government's firm intention to achieve a British price for British gas instead of letting the Scots suffer from this aspect of home rule?

I shall find out the exact figure as it affects the differential and write to the hon. Gentleman about it. The recent increase in domestic gas prices in Scotland was only 7 per cent., as against the United Kingdom average of 12 per cent. The tariffs are a matter for the British Gas Corporation. The hon. Gentleman no doubt took some interest in the matter when he was a member of a Conservative Government which had an opportunity to do something about it. Under the present Government the gap is narrowing considerably.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what reply he proposes to give to the request by the Central Electricity Generating Board to construct an oil-powered power station at Connah's Quay.

In accordance with the statutory procedures, the board's proposals are being advertised and the views of the local authorities concerned are being sought. My right hon. Friend will consider the application in the light of any comments which may be received.

In view of the world oil shortage and the emerging failure of the Government's programme for getting oil out of the North Sea, is it wise to allow the station to be constructed as a solely oil-fired station? Should it not be dual-purpose at the very least?

All matters, including any objections, would be considered in any inquiry. The question whether the station should be solely oil-fired would be one of the matters to be considered.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy what further action he is now proposing to encourage the saving of energy in houses and flats.

Energy saving in houses and flats will be one of the main targets of the publicity campaign which I am launching today. I have no proposals at present for specific new measures but am keeping the matter under review.

I welcome the announcement of the publicity campaign, which is long overdue, but why has the right hon. Gentleman no more specific proposals? Is it not time we had a sustained and vigorous attempt to persuade the public to switch off heating and lighting, which in many houses are still used to excess?

There is a great deal in what the hon. Gentleman says. When he has had time to consider the publicity campaign and the publicity material provided—I shall gladly send him a copy and all the information concerned—I think he will realise that a good deal is being done.

Will my right hon. Friend consult my hon. Friend the Minister for Housing and Construction about the matter, because the present rules which require a form of heating in living rooms but not in bedrooms cause an awful waste of energy in council-built accommodation?

I was not aware of that. We hope to have discussions on the matter with local authority associations very soon, and that is one subject which will be on the agenda.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he will state the present position in regard to the implementation of the tripartite plan for coal.

On 4th November, in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for Nottingham, West (Mr. English)—[Vol. 880, c. 41–2.]—my right hon. Friend made a statement in which he summarised the general conclusions of the final report of the tripartite coal industry examination. The Government are playing their part in implementing the recommendations of this report. In particular, a Bill to facilitate mining developments and to provide for the Government's contribution towards the cost of the National Coal Board's pneumoconiosis compensation scheme is to be introduced shortly.

I welcome my hon. Friend's answer, particularly the last part of his final sentence. May I ask him, however, to take this opportunity to reaffirm his confidence that Britain will, over the next decade at least, maintain a capacity to produce an annual tonnage of coal in excess of that produced in 1973 or 1974?

I give my hon. Friend the assurance that, arising out of the tripartite investigation, the NCB and the unions are confident that they will make sure that the mining industry is able to make a substantial contribution towards meeting the country's energy requirements.

Can my hon. Friend comment on the NCB's intentions concerning the closing of uneconomic pits? If we are to preserve coal as a form of energy, and to be less dependent on oil, does not my hon. Friend agree that the remaining few pits in Lanarkshire should be continued, even though they may be uneconomic for some time?

I am aware of my hon. Friend's great knowledge of the matter. There will be pit closures, because the mining industry is an extractive industry. What is significant, arising out of the inquiry, is that more searches for new coal reserves are going on in Britain than there are searches for energy in the North Sea. We are looking for new reserves to sustain an increased coal production. In that climate, there is no need for fear over the point my hon. Friend raised concerning pit closures.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy whether he is satisfied with the progress of his energy-saving campaign; and if he will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Energy if he is satisfied with the response to his recent statement on energy conservation.

It is too early yet to make any assessment on a programme of measures designed to achieve results over a period of time. I believe, however, that as my campaign begins to build up some energy savings are being made.

In view of the importance of keeping the public involved, which has been mentioned several times this afternoon, will the right hon. Gentleman give his full support to the appeal for good housekeeping, both industrial and domestic, that was made in The Times on Saturday by the Chairman of his Advisory Council on Energy Conservation, Sir William Hawthorne, who happens to be one of my most distinguished constituents?

Yes, I can give a positive assurance to the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what progress is being made with her suggestion for a Commonwealth Conference on Rural Development; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development when she will meet Commonwealth Ministers responsible for development to discuss food production.

In the absence of my right hon. Friend, who is unwell, I have been asked to reply.

Is my hon. Friend aware that this is an extremely welcome initiative as the provision of food is now the major problem facing many developing countries? Will he say whether in general the reappraisal of our aid programme is being made in the light of the world food crisis?

The conference itself will bear heavily on that matter. As my hon. Friend has mentioned, the initiative arises from the World Food Conference. We are not reappraising our aid programme on food but we are in general seeking to pursue a policy which will ensure that our aid programme is directed in particular towards the poorer developing nations. We hope that the Commonwealth conference will further that aim.

In view of the critical shortage of fertilisers in many countries following the increase in oil prices, will the Minister say what has happened to the proposal that there should be a Commonwealth scheme for increasing and sharing fertiliser production?

The Government have done a good deal on fertiliser projects. We are a net importer of fertilisers. The details are matters for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. This is precisely the kind of question that we would expect to be raised at the Commonwealth Ministers conference.

Does my hon. Friend agree that Britain's response to the world food crisis is a matter not only for our right hon. Friend the Minister of Overseas Development and our right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food but for many other Ministers and Departments? Has a comprehensive statement been made by the Government concerning all policies in all Departments, or has it still to be issued?

I think that that is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister.

The Commonwealth conference may help food-deficit countries in the long run, but is there not an appalling short-run problem? It is a fact that this year millions of people will die of starvation. Does the Minister think that 25,000 tons of fertiliser for the United Nations emergency programme—that is scarcely one ship load—is an adequate contribution? Will he give an assurance that this matter will be considered again?

The 25,000 tons has already been supplemented. As I have said, this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food. I will ensure that my right hon. Friend considers further what the hon. Gentleman has said.

If the conference takes place, will the Minister ensure that at least a part of it is devoted to the topic of supplying spare parts for essential equipment used in rural development? Further, will he ensure that our own house is put in order by supplying essential spares for grounded helicopters in Bangladesh?

I hope that the hon. Gentleman has not believed all he has read or seen on the television screen in that respect. If he was among the Members who wrote to my right hon. Friend or myself, he will know that there is another side to the story.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what progress has been made in concluding an association agreement with the ACP States.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development if she will make a statement on the present state of the negotiations on the European Development Fund and on the new convention with African, Caribbean and Pacific countries.

Ministers of the EEC and ACP countries held further discussions for three days last week on the terms of the new convention. They dis- cussed the trade régime, rules of origin and agricultural access, the proposed scheme of commodity stabilisation and financial and general aspects.

Is it not one of the striking facts about the negotiations that a a unity of view is held by the African countries which have been taking part? Is it not clear that Mr. George Thomson was absolutely right when he made the point that since we joined the Community more has been achieved in creating solidarity between the French-speaking and English-speaking former dependent territories in Africa than was achieved in the 15 years of the Community's existence before we joined?

I shall not comment on Mr. Thomson's remarks. It is fair to say that there has been a striking degree of unity between ACP countries as a whole in the negotiations.

Is it the case that under the convention more than 90 per cent. of the exports of the 46 ACP countries will in future enter the Community countries of the Nine duty-free? Will the Minister tell us what progress has been made with my right hon. Friend's proposal that there should be a second development fund to cover countries outside the 46 ACP countries?

Under the original Community offer about 95 per cent. of ACP exports to the Community would benefit from duty-free and levy-free entry or reduced levies. But some further improvements—notably the terms of access for beef—have now been proposed and will be discussed further at the next conference. Secondly, my right hon. Friend has been pressing hard her proposal in Brussels. It will be discussed further by the Ministers concerned.

asked the Minister of Overseas Development what formal inquiries are to be conducted into the affairs of the Crown Agents to establish responsibility for the situation revealed in her statement of 18th December.

The present position is that the Government await the report from the Chairman of the Crown Agents to which my right hon. Friend referred in her statement of 18th December. My right hon. Friend intends to make a further announcement after that.

Does my hon. Friend recall that in her statement of 18th December his right hon. Friend said that she would be considering what form any further inquiry would take? Will he tell us something about the form of the inquiry even if he cannot say anything about its timing at this stage? Without asking my hon. Friend to comment on Press reports over the weekend, may I ask him to confirm that a member of the staff of the Crown Agents has been suspended pending investigation and that certain papers are being considered by the Director of Public Prosecutions?

Yes. To the first part of my hon. Friend's question I cannot add to what I have already said. I think that my hon. Friend will give credit to my right hon. Friend for the diligence with which she has pursued the whole matter of the Crown Agents, both in opposition and in government. I think my hon. Friend will accept that she will take the right decision at the right time and that she will keep the House fully informed.

I appreciate the efforts of the hon. Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham). I once wrongly described him as exaggerating this whole affair. I hope he will accept that I withdraw that suggestion. Does the Minister agree that on 18th December his right hon. Friend made it clear that there was no question of criminal charges being raised?

I cannot add in that respect to what I have already said.

Does my hon. Friend think it is about time that severer and stricter instructions were given to the Crown Agents regarding their investments? Is it not right that we should take into account a number of ventures over the past several years ranging from their investments in slum property to the ill-faced Stonehouse-Bangladesh venture and the recent developments that have been referred to by my hon. Friend the Member for Islington, South and Finsbury (Mr. Cunningham)? Will he give an assurance that following these developments instructions will be given on future investments?

My right hon. Friend has made it clear that there is considerable change in this respect—that the new board she appointed will act in accordance with her directives. She explained in her statement of 31st July that the board would be responsible to her for the organisation and general administration of the Crown Agents' business. She has, of course, reserved the right to give it further directives from time to time.