asked the Secretary of State for Trade what applications in respect of the dumping of paper and board products he has received in the last month.

My Department has received no formal applications for action against either dumped or subsidised paper and board products.

I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman. Are the Government aware of the importance of effective and timely measures against dumping? Will the hon. Gentleman assure the House that any applications to prevent it will be dealt with promptly?

I can give that assurance, certainly.

Is my hon. Friend aware that there are proposals to construct tissue mills in Spain and Greece and that unless action is taken to prevent possible dumping from those sources the jobs of many workers in the British paper industry will be in danger? Will he seek to open negotiations with our Common Market partners about action that can be taken against these two countries, should the need arise, as they both have special trading arrangements with the EEC?

I am aware of the industry's concern about this, and I can assure my hon. Friend that my officials and those of the Department of Industry are closely in touch with the home industry and the trade association. We have had talks covering the possibility that some imports from our non-traditional suppliers may be either dumped or subsidised. I understand that the industry is looking more closely at some of the details that we shall require before deciding whether to pursue a case under the anti-dumping legislation.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what international discussions he proposes to have regarding the achievement of the Rambouillet commitment to the maintenance of an open trading system.

We shall continue to play a constructive part in the international organisations concerned with trade and we shall, in particular, work for substantial measures of liberalisation in the GATT multilateral trade negotiations.

Following the Prime Minister's talks at Rambouillet and his own recent speeches, will the Secretary of State confirm that he is personally opposed to import controls and assure the House that if extensive import controls are introduced later on, he, at least, unlike his colleague the Secretary of State for Industry, will have the courage to stick to his guns and resign?

I shall ignore the latter part of that supplementary question—

Why?

I have no doubt that my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry will have an opportunity to say what he thinks about the matter and, indeed, about the remarks of the hon. Member for Mid-Sussex (Mr. Renton).

We can all agree with the last part of the right hon. Gentleman's remarks, but will he give an absolute assurance that, on import controls, the Government will take no action that will infringe any of our international obligations?

I have explained already that international economic law provides a number of opportunities and circumstances in which it is accepted that import controls can be used. I do not think that I need go beyond that.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will seek to renegotiate the agreements between the United Kingdom and its former EFTA partners in respect of duty-free import quotas.

No, Sir. The present system has been in effective operation for only two years. It is intended to balance the interests of United Kingdom manufacturers and the needs of industrial users. Although the recession in the industry is greater than we expected in 1972, the arrangements still look generally right.

Is my hon. Friend aware that in respect of paper products imported under this quota system the industry tends to regard the competition that it faces from Scandinavian producers as unfair because British producers have to pay about 14 per cent. more for their pulp than do their competitors in Scandinavia? Is there not a case for reviewing quotas to ensure that they reflect the state of home demand? If home demand falls, the size of quotas given to our Scandinavian competitors should reflect that. In any discussions that my hon. Friend has, will he bear in mind that we have lost 20,000 jobs in the industry over the past eight years and that the Scandinavians are now taking three-quarters of the British market for newsprint?

The prices that we pay for pulp are not fixed arbitrarily by the Scandinavians, because we also import pulp from Canada. They are world prices, and they cannot be rigged by any one country.

Is it right that the rest of the EEC should be so highly protected while Britain carries the brunt of Scandinavian competition? What consideration has been given to trying to persuade our EEC partners to speed up the harmonisation process so that the burden is shared fairly?

The harmonisation process will be completed by 1st July 1977. We are transiting upwards in our duties on paper and board imports, and the EEC countries are transiting downwards. We shall both meet at 8 per cent. on 1st July 1977, and thereafter there is a timetable for phasing out these duties by 1984.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is satisfied with the working of the Cost Escalation Insurance Scheme.

The scheme has assisted in the successful negotiation of exports totalling nearly £130 million, and a large volume of potential business is at various stages of negotiation, but I am well aware of industry's views on the need for changes in the present arrangements and as a matter of urgency I am considering them again carefully, in the lght of our experience to date and of all other relevant factors, including cost.

Will the Secretary of State say when the review will be announced on the work of the scheme? When does he expect it to be completed? In view of his somewhat equivocal reply a few moments ago about import controls, will he at least agree that as a matter of general principle it is far better to remove our balance of payments deficit by encouraging British companies in the export market than to see the illusion of security behind import controls?

The House will agree that if we could solve our balance of payments problem through the expansion of exports, that would be the preferable solution. No one would doubt that. However, it is important to remember that it is clear that we can do that only if world trade is expanding. That is the point that we have emphasised over and over again. On the question of the scheme and the review, I hope that I shall be able to complete the review and make a statement before the Christmas Adjournment.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the only way to eliminate our current account deficit on the balance of payments is to eliminate the surplus on our capital account?

I think that there could be a relationship between the two. The right hon. Gentleman has put his proposition in a very interesting way. I shall consider it further, but at present I shall not be tempted to confirm or deny his proposal.

When reconsidering the position of the scheme will the right hon. Gentleman bear in mind that the French scheme, which is of a more flexible nature than ours, has had very material advantages for French exporters—advantages of a kind that we have not yet experienced?

Yes, I am aware that certain features of the French scheme are undoubtedly more generous than those that we introduced in the United Kingdom. Of course, as a consequence the French scheme is much more expensive than ours. I am certainly looking at all the relevant factors, including certain features of the French scheme.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what estimate he has made of the potential growth of British motor vehicle exports to the West Indies.

My Department keeps industry informed of export opportunities in the individual countries reported by our commercial posts in the area.

Is the Minister aware of the strong efforts being made by our Japanese competitors? In view of the great good will in the West Indies towards this country, will he assure us that the Government will give all possible support and encouragement to British manufacturers to increase their stake in this market in the years ahead?

I can certainly give the hon. Gentleman and the House that assurance. Recently a Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders' mission of component makers was in the area, and we now await with great interest its report on the opportunities in this market. Japanese competition is growing, but the British motor industry has a long association with this area, and we hope that that association will help it to maintain its trade.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he will make a further statement on motor vehicle exports and imports.

In the first 11 months of this year, import penetration of the United Kingdom car market was 33·4 per cent. compared with 27·1 per cent. in the corresponding period in 1974. During the period from January to November 1975, exports of passenger motor cars were £451–3 million, compared with imports of £473–6 million. This compared with the corresponding period of 1974, of exports of £355–4 million and imports of £2919 million. The composition of our car imports has changed in recent months, with the Japanese proportion falling and others rising.

I thank my right hon. Friend for that information. Does it not indicate that in passenger cars there is still a disparity between what we export and import, on the wrong side of the balance of payments? Does my right hon. Friend agree that as most of the importers have built up substantial stocks of vehicles in this country in possible anticipation of import controls, and as British Leyland appears to have seriously underestimated its sales potential, this only serves to underline the Government's case for saving Chrysler?

The House will not expect me to anticipate anything that may be said later about Chrysler. Clearly, the question of the capacity of the British motor car industry and the question of increasing our own output sufficiently to meet demand is of the utmost importance, and particularly so at the present time. As my hon. Friend notes, this year we have a deficit of about £22 million in our exchange in trade in passenger motor cars, and this represents a considerable and adverse change from what it was last year. This again emphasises the need for continued effort by the British motor car industry, in some cases, clearly, with the help of the Government, to get our motor car industry back firmly on its feet. With regard to other vehicles and components, and so on, we still have a favourable and, indeed, increasing trade balance.

When the right hon. Gentleman considers the pressure for import controls will he bear in mind that the Fourteenth Report of the Expenditure Committee shows clearly that Ryder assumed BLMC sales to EEC countries increasing by 95 per cent. by 1985, and that if he takes any action that causes a counteraction that aborts that 95 per cent. increase in sales, widespread unemployment will be caused within BLMC and much of the public investment in it will fail to achieve the objects for which it was put in?

I am certainly not in any way going to write down the possibilities of a considerable increase in BLMC exports to Europe, but the hon. Gentleman knows that if one considers BLMC products as a whole one finds that it is in markets other than Western Europe that the company has achieved, and in my view will continue to achieve, greater success.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade how many complaints he has received about noise from Concorde.

2,832 complaints have been received either during or since the recent endurance flying programme. This figure includes both complaints received by the Department direct and those received first by the British Airports Authority and by British Airways.

Why do we have to rely on the Americans to enforce British noise regulations at Heathrow?

The hon. Gentleman is seeking to anticipate the hearings that will start in the United States on 5th January. I am quite certain that the Americans will apply a fairness of judgment in arriving at their decision.

Has my hon. Friend any breakdown of complaints received from abroad where Concorde is flown into foreign airports?

No, Sir.

As my hon. Friend the Member for Twickenham (Mr. Jessel) is concerned about landing noise in his constituency—

No, take-off noise.

—will the Minister confirm not only that, for instance, the Boeing 707-320C is noisier than Concorde, but that in 1976 there will be four movements a week of Concorde through Heathrow and 550 of the Boeing 707-320C?

The hon. Gentleman is quite right. At the Casablanca trials the landing noise of the Boeing aircraft to which he has referred was 120 EPNdbs, compared with the landing noise of Concorde of 116·7 EPNdbs.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement on current negotiations concerning Concorde in which his Department is involved.

Negotiations are being vigorously pursued so that the scheduled services can start as planned, and statements will be made at the appropriate times.

Does the hon. Gentleman agree with the Wall Street Journal that the anti-Concorde industry in the United States is involving itself in what that paper has described as the "meanest kind of politics"? If that is so, and if New York should decide to ban Concorde for spurious environmental reasons, does the Minister agree that British trade unionists would be entitled to consider retaliatory action against the Port of New York Authority, perhaps by ensuring that goods exported from that port by air or sea were subjected to appropriate political delays on entering this country?

It is far more profitable that we should deal in facts rather than in epithets on this important issue. We are hopeful, as I have said before, that we shall get a fair hearing in Washington, starting on 5th January. As a result, we have reason to believe that we shall not have to deal with the question of retaliation.

I hope that the Minister is right.

Will my hon. Friend take this opportunity of denying that the first commercial flight of Concorde from this country will be delayed by disputes over aircrew pay?

I have no reason to believe that we shall not be able to commence our flights as arranged on 21st January, contemporaneously with Air France.

In the current negotiations concerning the flight routes for Concorde, have overflying routes been requested from India? If so, what answer has been received?

We are at present continuing discussions with the Indian Government. I do not think that it would be profitable to go further than that at this stage.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he proposes this Session to bring in a measure to reform United Kingdom patent law on the lines proposed in Command Paper No. 6000, or whether he will bring in during the Session a short Bill which would enable Her Majesty's Government to ratify pending international patent conventions by the promised dates.

I am aware that ratification by the United Kingdom of the European Patent Convention at the end of 1976 is important for British interests, and my right hon. Friend intends to introduce a comparatively short Bill to enable this as soon as circumstances permit. Further legislation will be necessary to enact the White Paper proposals for patent law reform and to permit ratification of the Patent Co-operation Treaty and of the Community Patent Convention, which is being signed in Luxembourg today. Due to pressure of parliamentary business it will not be possible to introduce this more comprehensive legislation during the present Session.

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's answer. He says "as soon as circumstances permit". Can he be more precise and say that it will be in time for us to have English representatives in the European Patent Office at Munich? Obviously "as soon as circumstances permit" is a parliamentary term. After eight years of discussion on this subject there must be something wrong with our system if everybody else is setting it up and we are not there.

As I have indicated, we hope to be able to introduce legislation, if at all possible, within the current Session. But this is not, as my hon. Friend will recognise, entirely within the control of the Department of Trade. I am very much aware of the need for this legislation and of the handicaps which will arise, especially in relation to our representatives at the European Patent Office, if we do not have this legislation.

Will the Minister beware representing as reforms what are lamentable necessities? Is it not a fact that the Banks Committee's recommendation is basically to import into patent law the German concept of obviousness, which is generally regarded in this country as impracticable, and to separate the enforcement into validity litigation in, say, Germany, and infringement litigation in the country in which the alleged infringement has taken place? Is this not really the legality of Bedlam?

I do not accept the hon. and learned Gentleman's views. The Banks Committee put forward a variety of propositions which we would seek to enact in a comprehensive Bill. This would have included a number of controversial aspects. The hon. and learned Gentleman has referred to one of them. We also have to take into account the question of a code for employees' inventions and, as I have indicated, a number of other controversial matters.

In this important matter is there not a need to use the powers for Crown use? Is it not true that, either because the Government have not been energetic or because the 1949 Act is not clear, those powers have not been used anywhere near the extent to which they should have been used, and that this has been noticeable in regard to proprietary medicines?

My hon. Friend has touched upon another aspect of the Banks Committee's proposals, dealing with the compulsory licensing of pharmaceuticals. I cannot accept in its entirety the indictment that has been levelled by my hon. Friend. However, he has made an important point, and we would clearly be anxious to legislate on this matter at the earliest opportunity.

Is the Minister aware that it is three years since the Banks Report was published? Surely the House is entitled to debate this matter before legislation is introduced. Will he use his best endeavours with the Leader of the House to see whether time can be made available for a debate?

I shall draw the attention of my right hon. Friend to the hon. Gentleman's observations.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he expects the consultation on the consultative document, Airfield Strategy for Great Britain, Part I The London Area, to be completed.

It is essential that adequate time is allowed for all interested organisations to put their views, and I envisage that the consultations will last about six months.

I am grateful to the right hon. Gentleman for that answer. Will he tell us whether he intends to deal with the first part—on area—onducting consultations, or at least reaching conclusions on consultations, about the remainder of the United Kingdom airports? May I urge upon him the necessity to leave time after the consultations to go through all the statutory procedures that will be necessary to ensure that London is adequately served by airports in the early 1980s?

I hesitate to answer the second part of the hon. Gentleman's question because I am not quite sure at the moment what all the statutory procedures are. If they are laid-down procedures, which it is incumbent upon us to go through, I shall certainly not wish to depart from them.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the great potential of Rhoose Airport, in Glamorgan, which is vastly under-utilised at this time? Will he assure the House that in that context no decisions will be taken which could affect that airport, by way of running it down before the overall strategy has been worked out?

Rhos Airport does not come within the direct scope, authority or financing of the Department of Trade. Therefore, I cannot give a categorical assurance on that matter. I hope that all those who are today managing substantial airports, of which Rhoose is certainly one, will take account of the consultation exercise that is now being started and not seek, as it were, to make major decisions within their areas until those consultations are completed.

Is my right hon. Friend aware that Liverpool Airport is costing a lot of money and that the Merseyside County Council is, in substance, keeping it going? The longer there are no decisions on the matter, the more costly it will be for local authorities and ratepayers in that area. May we have a quick decision, so that the local authorities will know precisely where they stand? We believe that Merseyside has great potential, but we cannot move one way or the other because of the present situation.

I understand and sympathise with my hon. Friend's concern. We have something of a dilemma here. On the one hand, there is an undoubted need for a decision as early as possible, but, on the other, in this area, with all the sensitive local feeling that exists, I believe that we must allow people adequate consultation.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will seek additional powers to dissuade airlines and others from discounting scheduled fares on airline tickets.

The recent court actions have demonstrated that the Government have strong powers to enforce approved fares and rates of commission. Efforts are being made by the travel trade and airlines to stamp out illegal discounting. We have, however, made it plain that if such efforts are not successful we intend to use these powers. I can assure the hon. Member that if we find that additional powers are required we shall have no hesitation in seeking the authority of Parliament to obtain them.

The Government were no doubt right to have relied so far on the efforts of the airlines in what is known as "Operation Clean-up". Does the Minister agree that if cheaper air travel is ever to become universally available it is necessary to eliminate the illegal discounting that is taking place? To that end, will he assure me that he will keep a very close eye and car on developments in this matter and will not hesitate to intervene at Government level should that prove necessary?

I am obliged to the hon. Gentleman for enabling me to forecast what his supplementary question was to be from an article which appeared in The Times this morning. I can give him the assurance for which he asks.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he will publish the White Paper on civil aviation policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he now expects to publish his White Paper on his review of civil aviation policy.

I expect to publish this White Paper early next year.

I thank the Secretary of State for that reply. In the time accruing from the delay in publication of the White Paper will the right hon. Gentleman consider two basic problems that arise from his statement last July, to see whether it is possible to correct them? The first is that the abandonment of dual designation for British airlines on routes overseas deserves compensating rights being given to this country by the Governments of countries whose airlines are to get extra business opportunities from this policy. The second is that the abandonment of Sky-train deserves to be rethought, because it is contrary to the wishes of the public, particularly those polled in the Minister's constituency and that of his hon. Friend.

The question of dual designation is at the heart of the policy review and of the statement that I made in July. Various arithmetical exercises are still being conducted regarding Sky-train and its effects. However, the fact remains that it is extremely difficult to see how it could fit in with a policy which, for broader and, I think, generally acceptable reasons, has led us to abandon dual designation.

Are we to assume that the delay in publication of the White Paper is due to continuing disagreement by British Airways about the proposed transfer of routes? If so, will the Secretary of State prevail upon British Airways to forgo its petty resentment of the original transfer of routes, which amounted to no more than 1 per cent. of its revenue at the time the second force airline was established and to accept that a reasonable exchange of routes, particularly within designated spheres of influence, would be in the interests of both the fare-paying passenger and, in the long run, the taxpayer?

No. I think that it would be wrong to single out British Airways and in any sense attribute, as it were, petty calculations and considerations to its consideration of the problem. On the contrary, British Airways is thinking carefully about it. Indeed, it has a duty to do so. Equally, I am sure that British Caledonian has thought and still is thinking carefully about what is involved for it. I know that both airlines are approaching the question in a constructive way, and I am hopeful for their success.

May I say how glad we are that the Secretary of State is at least continuing to do the arithmetic on Skytrain, which implies that his mind is not totally closed to the concept of licensing it? That will be a great encouragement to many of us and to many would-be travellers.

I would not wish to be misunderstood about what I said with regard to Skytrain. I said that I do not see how it can fit in with a policy of the abandonment of dual designation. I hope that the discussions between British Airways and British Caledonian will come to a conclusion and I hope, further, to announce the results and, indeed, more broadly, the new policy statement in the new year.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that great uncertainty has occurred since his statement in the House in July, and that the non-publication of the White Paper has led to a great deal of uncertainty for British Caledonian Airways, which he has recognised is an efficient airline? Will he accept that his statement in July overturned all the long-term plans of British Caledonian and that it has, as yet, no indication of what its replacement opportunities will be? Will the right hon. Gentleman give the airline an indication of what is to happen to it?

As with all matters that are difficult and require considerable negotiation and discussion, delay is involved, but that is, I hope, the way in which we reach agreements and conclusions. We reach them basically by people talking over the problems and trying to come up with reasonable solutions. Perhaps my statement did cause uncertainty, but all I can say is that events caused far greater uncertainty to British Caledonian and the airline industry generally than did any statement that I made.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what changes have taken place in Anglo-Soviet trade as a result of the agreement signed after the Prime Minister's visit to Moscow earlier in the year; and which industries are likely to benefit.

Our exports to the Soviet Union have increased in value by almost 100 per cent. this year compared with last year. My discussions with the Soviet Minister of Foreign Trade last week confirmed that there are good prospects for British companies in a wide range of industries, including, in particular, the chemical, petrochemical and agrochemical industries and the textile machinery industry.

I am sure that the whole House will be grateful to my right hon. Friend for the efforts that he is making in this area. I understand that the Chamber of Commerce delegation, on its return from Russia, confirmed the statement that he made this afternoon. Will he say what effect this increased trade, which we all very much welcome, is likely to have on West Midlands industries, particularly the engineering industry, which has received considerable blows latterly and in which unemployment is at a high level?

As my hon. Friend knows, it is in the area of electrical and mechanical machinery and engineering products generally that the Soviet demand is likely to be felt most, and it is in those areas of the country, including the Midlands, where we make engineering goods of all kinds that the benefit is likely to be felt. I emphasise again that the prospects are reasonably good. There has been a most welcome increase in our exports this past year.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say what was the original value that has increased by 100 per cent.? Will he also say whether he feels it is worth the risk of hundreds of so-called inspectors snooping round British factories?

If one compares exports during the 10 months from January to October 1974 with those for the 10 months from January to October 1975, one finds that the figure increased from £86 million to £170 million. In a sense, it is small in terms of total trade. I have always felt that the magnitude of our trade with the Soviet Union, given the size of our country and theirs, is far too small.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade how many requests he has received since 1st January 1975 for the introduction of selective import controls on textiles.

About 265. Of these, about 225 have been requests for general controls on textiles and clothing imports, while about 40 have related to particular products.

Does my hon. Friend accept that that reply shows the extensive agreement within the textile industry that import controls would be helpful and useful to the industry? Does he further accept that there is great anxiety in the industry and eagerness for a reply to two questions? First, when will the Government act on import controls for textiles? Second, when they act, will those controls be wide ranging and effective?

All of us in the Government are impressed with the joint approach of the textile industry, as with that of other sensitive industries, in the matter of safeguarding employment. We are well aware of the anxiety, But I remind my hon. Friend and those who think as he does that we already have a considerable number of import controls on textiles, which were detailed the last time that my hon. Friend asked a similar question, on 3rd November. As for the other questions, may I, with respect, ask my hon. Friend to await the statement which I know he and the whole House are expecting later this week?

The Secretary of State earlier mentioned the 33 per cent. import penetration of the British car industry. Is the Minister aware that the textile industry has been penetrated to the extent of 60 per cent.? Will he hurry up in coming forward with an announcement of quantitative controls? Will he, further, consider a long-term regulator for the British textile industry? Such a regulation is urgently required.

The multi-fibre arrangement under GATT, which the Community is negotiating on our behalf with a number of lciw-cost suppliers, is the real long-term regulator, because it involves the concept of burden sharing. As the House will know, this country has borne more than its fair share of textile and clothing imports from low-cost countries, and that burden will be gradually shared out between us and the other members of the Community. As for imports generally, and import penetration, in most textile sectors imports have been falling this year and, in the main, so has import penetration. However, imports of woollen and worsted yarns and fabrics and of man-made fibre cloth have risen. It is a mixed picture. In clothing, import penetration in knitwear and hosiery has risen, but the figure in other types of made-up clothing has remained fairly steady.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is no valid meaning in the term "the textile industry," since it consists of many separate and distinct industries, and that there is a danger of damaging the export prospects of certain textile industries by generalising on the basis of others?

That is certainly a consideration that the Government and my Department have very much in mind.

Why does my hon. Friend not refrain from answering all the questions which these other countries throw up arising out of our desire to protect the jobs of British workers? As my hon. Friend was an anti-Common Market campaigner, like me, what does he think of the argument that although we have to suffer wide-scale import controls on nearly all our basic foodstuffs we are running away from the question in terms of textiles and all the other things that involve his Department?

I agree with my hon. Friend about the need to protect the jobs of British workers. Where I think he and I, and perhaps other hon. Members, would differ slightly is on the question whether import controls, whether general or selective, would, on balance, protect more jobs than they would lose. On the few occasions so far on which we have applied special import controls—I could quote a couple of examples, if my hon. Friend would like them—we have lost as many jobs as we have gained, and we have lost them in areas that should be developing British industry for the future rather than in industries which are at present contracting.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that what is urgently required is faster and more effective action against dumping, and that there is considerable dissatisfaction with the help that his Department gives to those who are seeking to establish the facts in a specific case? Second, referring to the unsatisfactory answer that his right hon. Friend gave to Question No. 2, will the Minister, lest there should be any doubt about it, again confirm that on import controls the Government will take no action that will be contrary in any way to our international agreements?

On the second part of that question, I think that my right hon. Friend gave a perfectly satisfactory answer. As for import controls generally, and the concern that has been expressed, we have met the CBI to discuss these matters and the anti-dumping measures that we can take to help. I assure the hon. Gentleman that I think that we have satisfied the representatives of British industry—the industrialists in particular—that the anti-dumping measures that we are taking and the attitude that we are adopting in the Department of Trade are different from what they were in previous decades, and that we are now acting as speedily as is possible under the terms of the GATT Anti-Dumping Code and our own legislation of 1969.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he expects the report on London and County to be published.

We are unable to say when we expect to be in a position to publish the inspectors' report in this matter, but it will be as soon as possible.

Will my hon. Friend be a little more forthcoming on the question whether or not the investigators have taken into account the way in which the Crown Agents, acting for another Government Department, lent money to London and County Securities Ltd., especially taking account of the fact that parliamentary advisers, in the shape of the leader of the Liberal Party, were in a position to advise that the law was being broken by the lending of such money in violation of the Moneylenders Acts? Will he give me an assurance—

Order. That appears to me to be a reflection on a right hon. Member. That can be done only by a motion.

I might get around to that one day.

I must repudiate wholly the allegations made by my hon. Friend—

It happens everywhere else.

It would, of course, be quite improper of me to comment on the report in part. Indeed, it would be not only improper but contrary to the legislation that covers these matters. As I have told my hon. Friend, we shall publish the report at the earliest opportunity, but there are very good reasons at present for not doing so.

Will the Minister give us an idea of what he means by "the earliest opportunity"? Is he aware that many of us have been waiting for this report for a considerable time—

Hear, hear.

—and would strongly support the request of the hon. Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) that it be published early? Is he also aware that some of us are tired of the sick innuendoes that are constantly made by the hon. Member for Bolsover about this report, and that many of us have good reason to believe that if the report were published quickly those innuendoes would be proved to be baseless?

The hon. Gentleman has not hidden his naked ambitions very well. "As soon as possible" means precisely that.

You have had it for months now. Get on with it. Do your job.

The great desperation of certain Members of the Liberal Party is certainly a revelation to the House.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what progress he has made in his consideration of the Civil Aviation Authority report as it affects Speke Airport.

The advice from the Civil Aviation Authority on Airport Development in the Central England Area is being taken into account in the preparation of a consultation document on regional Airports.

Is the Minister aware that an efficient airport is of tremendous value in encouraging industrial development and investment and that any phasing down of Speke Airport may have a disastrous effect of the employment situation on Merseyside?

The question of phasing down Speke Airport or the expansion of that airport in anticipation of the consultation process to which my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State referred earlier is not a matter for my Department, as the hon. Gentleman well knows. I hope that the consultation process will be fruitful and that as a result we shall obtain a national airport strategy at long last.

In view of the fact that my hon. Friend the Minister visited the airport some weeks ago and that a decision has still not been taken on this matter, will my hon. Friend take note of what I said earlier and what the hon. Gentleman has now said? A decision must be taken on this, so that the people of Merseyside know the future of the airport.

The fact that we have not had—indeed, have never had—a national airport strategy causes great concern. It is right that in embarking on discussions of this character, which will have a longterm effect, all interests concerned should be consulted and play a part in the process. That is important. The penalty for this is delay, but that is a regrettable but inevitable consequence.

Will the Minister undertake to have detailed consultations with the Department of the Environment over its future planning of roadways in the area, which may crucially affect the Civil Aviation Authority's report on Speke Airport?

My hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for the Environment and I shall be carrying out a joint consultation exercise. Therefore, I can give the hon. Lady that assurance.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he expects to receive the study on the immediate problems of the newspaper industry which he has requested from the Royal Commision on the Press.

I understand that the Royal Commission is aiming to provide the report on the immediate problems facing national newspapers by the end of January 1976.

Is the Secretary of State aware that by the end of January the newspaper industry as a whole will be facing a number of unprecedentedly severe problems—not only financial problems, because virtually every newspaper is losing money, but also human problems, in that a large number of redundancies look like being inevitable if the new printing technology that will save the newspapers is implemented? Against that background, will the Secretary of State be fast and flexible in his response to the recommendations of the Royal Commission, so that the impending crisis can be averted?

The hon. Gentleman speaks with considerable knowledge of the industry. I have been made aware of the serious problems that have faced the industry, particularly the national Press, over the past year. I asked the Royal Commission to present an interim report because I was worried about the scale of the problems and the timing of the difficulties in relation to the longer-term consideration by the Royal Commission. We hope to receive a report from the Royal Commission by the end of January and we shall give it the closest attention as soon as we receive it.

Is my hon. Friend aware that although there was opposition to setting up the Royal Commission, there is now a general recognition that it should have been set up? My hon. Friend will be receiving a report early in January on the immediate problems. When can we expect the full report to be published? One of the main problems to which the Royal Commission was asked to address itself was the concentration of the ownership of the Press into a few hands.

My hon. Friend knows very well that the long-term and in many ways most important questions affecting the Press require the accumulation and sifting of a great deal of evidence, and it will take the Royal Commission some time before it can produce its final report. Therefore, it is all the more important to make sure that if measures can be taken in the short term they should be taken so that we can at least be certain that we have a substantial national Press to report upon in a year or so's time.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is having discussions with the liquidator of Nation Life to see whether his charges can be reduced.

No, Sir. The liquidator's remuneration is primarily a matter for the creditors and the committee of inspection representing them. My Department would not intervene unless it became apparent that the amount ultimately fixed was, in the circumstances, unnecessarily large.

What is the Minister's estimate of the present charges that will be made by the liquidator in this case?

It is not possible for me to answer that, because the answer depends upon the amount of the assets that are realised. As the hon. Gentleman will know from his professional experience, the fee is on an ad valorem basis, on the realisation of assets.

Will my hon. Friend give no aid or comfort to the idea, put forward by the accountant acting on behalf of the William Stern Group, of operating not under the bankruptcy procedure but under the Deeds of Arrangement Act 1914, which would have meant that the proposition would have allowed William Stern to have £20,000 a year to live on and to pay only two-thirds of any money over and above that which he earned in any one year? Will he also take into account the fact that if we reduce the liabilities we shall reduce the amount of money that could be obtained by the Crown Agents and other Government Departments, which are attempting to get back £400 million worth of taxpayers' money, which was lent wrongly in the first place?

I am sure that the liquidator will take into account what my hon. Friend said.

Will the Minister say what is likely to be the fee charged by his Department and what relation that has to the actual costs borne by his Department?

I have already indicated the basis upon which the Department's fees are charged. If the hon. Gentleman wishes me to go into the details, which he obviously does, no doubt he will table a Question to that effect.

Is the Minister aware that there is grave concern in the House about the basis on which the fees are charged and that a pro rata basis may be appropriate for a medium-sized company but is inappropriate for a small company, and amounts to very large sums when a company the size of Nation Life is involved? We have now been waiting for some weeks for a satisfactory response in answers to Written Questions. Will the hon. Gentleman give the House an assurance that he will examine this matter and review carefully the extremely heavy burden that the total of charges being made imposes on Nation Life policyholders?

As in the debate on this matter, the hon. Gentleman avoids the main functions of the Department as a whole in this area. They are designed for the protection of creditors at large, not simply in one case but in a large number of cases. They cover the receipt of investments, payment out of funds, and supervisory and advisory functions, and they deal with the statutory audit and the statutory duties of the Official Receiver. All these matters have to be covered. It is no use the hon. Gentleman using, as he did on the previous occasion, the word "distasteful" when he ignores the essential nature of the functions that have to be undertaken.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what steps he intends to take to assist firms manufacturing television sets.

Assistance will continue to be available for our growing exports of televisions. I am also keeping a close watch on imports, and I have announced my intention of introducing surveillance licensing on imports of colour television sets and receivers.

It seems that the right hon. Gentleman is seeking to give a somewhat vague set of aids. Will he, in addition, put pressure on the Chancellor of the Exchequer to end the 25 per cent. rate of VAT, which is having a marked effect on the work of those employed in our television factories?

I assure the hon. Lady that I am in close touch with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor. All matters relevant to the success and health of the British television industry are discussed between us.