asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the current price of potatoes; and what the price was in February 1975.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the average retail price for potatoes at the latest available date.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what was the price of potatoes at the most recent available date.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the average retail price of potatoes at the latest available date.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the cost of one pound of potatoes, at the latest date for which figures are available; and what was the comparable price two years ago.

The average price collected for the Retail Price Index on 9th December 1975, the latest date for which this information is available, was 7·5p a lb. for whites and 8p a lb. for reds. Average retail prices in February 1975 were 3·1p for whites and 3·6p for reds; and in February 1974 2·4p for whites and 2·9p for reds.

Since the Government have allowed the price of potatoes to increase by at least three times in the past two years—and the price has gone up since the latest figures were produced—may I ask whether the Government are aware that potatoes are a basic item of diet for most families? Or have the Government taken medical advice and learnt that potatoes have a heavy carbohydrate content and cause a great deal of obesity and many heart attacks, and decided that they are therefore bad for the people?

The hon. Gentleman will know that it has not been through any action of the Government that the price increase in potatoes has been so substantial. He will realise that the Government are concerned about the high price of potatoes, particularly because of its effect upon older people and the less well-off. There are, however, nutritious alternatives available.

Did not the speech of the Secretary of State to the National Farmers' Union concerning her inability to hold back the increase in the price of potatoes confirm the powerlessness of the Secretary of State and the whole Ministry in the face of the law of supply and demand?

My right hon. Friend will know that the principal cause of the present high price of potatoes was the weather of last summer, over which not even my right hon. Friend has power.

Why not?

If the hon. Gentleman will suggest how she might acquire that control we shall listen.

Does the Minister agree that the shortage is not only due to the weather but is also affected by the reduced acreage grown? If prices are to come down next season does the Minister accept that he must persuade the Minister of Agriculture to increase support prices so as to provide an incentive for farmers to grow potatoes?

The hon. Member, with his knowledge of agriculture, will appreciate that the principal reason for the decline in the potato harvest was the decline in the yield and not in the acreage. There has been a slight decline here. Target acreages have not been achieved under successive Governments. The relevance of the guarantee is not immediately apparent, in that it has not been effective since 1971. If the hon. Gentleman has any further points, he may wish to put them to the Minister of Agriculture.

Does my hon. Friend appreciate that we on the Labour Benches are fully aware that he cannot forecast the weather nine months ahead? Is he further aware that potatoes are the staple diet of the lower income groups and of schoolchildren? Does he realise that the fish and chip fryers in Yorkshire and Lancashire are up in arms about the price of potatoes? When does he intend to do something to prevent the excessive hoarding of potatoes by farmers and to stop the wholesaler and retailer from taking advantage of a situation in which they have cornered the market?

My hon. Friend is right to emphasise the seriousness of this matter. It would, however, be wrong to intervene directly to control the price of potatoes. To do so would inevitably lead to the consequences that have been felt in Belgium, where potatoes have disappeared from the market. There is no evidence that farmers or distributors—or, for that matter, consumers—are hoarding in appreciable quantities. Normal marketing requires some potatoes to be kept back, for consumption later in the year. If there were any such hoarding we would deplore it. The Potato Marketing Board has advised farmers to continue their orderly marketing.

While I accept that there is nothing that the Secretary of State can do about the weather, may I ask the Under-Secretary to tell the House whether any Minister from his Department representing the consumer interest participated in the talks initiated by the Potato Marketing Board as early as last July, when it was clear that there would be a serious shortage? Can the Minister say that steps were taken then to make urgent representations to the European Commission, asking for the suspension of tariffs while potatoes were still available? Can he further say whether the Potato Marketing Board has any direct access to his Department? If the hon. Gentleman's reply to my questions is in the negative, I ask, "Why".

The hon. Lady will know that as early as last summer—the period to which she referred—my right hon. Friend asked the Price Commission to keep a close watch upon distributors' margins, which is the matter for which she has particular responsibility. The hon. Lady will also know that my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food approached the European Community and that we have had the suspension of the common external tariff on imports of main crop potatoes from countries outside the EEC. We have also banned the export of ware potatoes. We have lifted the restriction on imports of potatoes. The Potato Marketing Board has allowed the riddle size to be adjusted to allow all potatoes worth selling to be marketed.

Question No. 2. Mr. Renton, also about potatoes.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she is satisfied that there is no excessive profiteering in the current retail price of potatoes.

Although no evidence has been found of excessive margins in distribution, I have asked the Price Commission for monthly reports.

I apologise, Mr. Speaker, for still being on the subject of potatoes.

The question of the duration of the ban on imports is under continual review by my right hon. Friend, as is the question of margins. I would also refer to the indication that I have given that the Price Commission will be making monthly reports. We have no reason to believe that unjustifiable margins are being attained. Cash margins for distributors generally are somewhat higher than last year, but percentage margins are appreciably lower.

Will my hon. Friend explain why my right hon. Friend can say, in an answer, that the price of potatoes is a matter of supply and demand and that price control is out of the question and yet, last week, she was able to explain to the House that on 50 items, irrespective of supply and demand, she will introduce an element of control? Why cannot she do this with potatoes?

In announcing the selective price restraint scheme last week my right hon. Friend made it clear that because of seasonality of production and differences of supply and demand, fresh food would not be kept within the ambit of the scheme. It would be impossible to interevene and control prices without a system of rationing, which would be quite impossible to set up in the short time available, or without incurring the risk of driving the potato right off the market—by doing as the Belgians have done and creating a black market.

On the question of exports, is the Minister aware that at the time of my family holiday in Teneriffe last August it was a matter of amused comment that the Canary Islands, of all places, were importing potatoes from the United Kingdom, although the ban on exports did not take place until two months later? Why did not the Department act sooner to protect the consumer?

My right hon. Friend acted as soon as was appropriate to ensure that the ban would have effect in helping consumers in this country to have potatoes.

Will my hon. Friend be a little more specific than his mere statement that he has no evidence of profiteering? Is he aware that throughout the country there is a great deal of suspicion on this subject, and that a ministerial statement simply to the effect that there is no evidence will not satisfy anyone? Will he be a little more specific about the investigations that his Department has made into this matter and which have provided such evidence?

It is understandable that there should be suspicion when the rise in the price of potatoes is as high as it has been. But no evidence, direct or indirect, has been submitted to my Department by any individual or association which suggests that there has been profiteering. However, if my hon. Friend has such evidence I am certainly willing to examine it, as I would examine evidence provided by anybody on this subject, because it deeply concerns us. The Price Commission has been given the specific remit of performing the task of monitoring prices—distributors' prices in particular—and I believe that it is carrying out that task with its usual thoroughness.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will make a further statement on the price of potatoes.

I refer the hon. Member to the answers that I have already given this afternoon.

In the Minister's view do the marketing boards take full account of consumers' interests? Will he explain to me, as a layman, why the sugar beet acreage should be increased when there is a glut of sugar and the potato acreage for next year is to be reduced when there appears to be a shortage and the prospect of a further shortages?

Decisions on target acreages are for my right hon. Friend the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, but I understand that no final views have been taken. As for the protection of consumers' interests. I drew the attention of hon. Members this afternoon to the setting up, by the Consumer Committee of the Potato Marketing Board, of an inquiry in investigate these questions.

Is my hon. Friend satisfied that current price increases by large-scale potato processors reflect the true price that was paid for those potatoes? Do not large-scale users buy huge acreages many months before the potatoes are lifted? Do the recent price increases in potato crisps, for example, accurately reflect the price at which the potatoes were originally bought? Should not the Department be investigating and remedying this matter?

Potato manufacturers are subject to the same controls as other manufacturers in respect of their allowable costs and the control of their profit margins. I have no evidence of unjustifiable increases permitted by the Price Commission. If my hon. Friend has a specific case in mind, I shall ensure that the Price Commission has the facts.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what representations she has received about the hoarding of potatoes and price levels currently being charged for potatoes by domestic growers and retailers.

We have received 125 letters about the price of potatoes, of which 12 mentioned hoarding.

I apologise to my hon. Friend for bringing him back to the subject of potatoes. Should he not tell the House that, although, according to an earlier answer, his Department has not received any evidence about hoarding, it is very widespread in the public mind that hoarding may be going on? Would he not care to say publicly that if, in the present potato famine, growers are hoarding in clamps, it will lead to great public ill will and probably also to an outbreak of petty crime?

Lest there should be any misunderstanding, I should point out that it is true that potato producers do not release all potato stocks on to the market at one time. They must spread them out over the period until the next domestic potato season begins, which is in May. This does not mean that there is evidence of hoarding; it simply means that proper judgment is being exercised to ensure that supplies are spread out to meet the needs of the consumer. If my hon. Friend has evidence of the kind that lie thinks is worrying the public, my right hon. Friend and the Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food will examine it carefully. I repeat that the consumption of potatoes in this country is up substantially on last year's consumption, which does not suggest that potatoes are being held hack.

Will my hon. Friend deny rumours that the Leader of the Opposition has her own clamp?

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she will take action to reduce the price of Southern Hemisphere apples from Australia, New Zealand and South Africa during spring and early summer.

If the hon. Member has evidence that distributors' margins in the United Kingdom for Southern Hemisphere apples are excessive, I shall be glad if he will let me see it.

As the Minister is, nevertheless, a member of the Government, is he aware that the Commission of the European Economic Community, and particularly the Dutch Government, are pressing for a curb, and even for a ban, on the importation of Southern Hemisphere apples from Australia, South Africa and New Zealand? Will he get his right hon. Friend to give an assurance that the British consumer will have an adequate tariff-free supply of Southern Hemisphere apples, rather than having to have the rather more expensive and rather dull Golden Delicious apples from the apple mountain?

I am aware of the representations that certain Common Market Governments have made. I am also aware that the Market is approaching producers about a possible voluntary restraint on supplies to the EEC. At this stage we are having discussions about the implications of this matter with our colleagues in the Ministry of Agriculture. Fisheries and Food.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what discussions she has had with the Retail Consortium and the CBI regarding plans for voluntary price restraint on basic foods and other household goods.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will make a statement on her negotiations with industry and commerce leading to the introduction of selective voluntary price restraint.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she has reached agreement on her selective price restraint scheme; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she has reached agreement on her selective price restraint scheme; and if she will make a statement.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether she has reached agreement on her selective price restraint scheme; and if she will make a statement.

My right hon. Friend described the outcome of her discussions on the selective price restraint scheme in her statement on 27th January. The scheme comes into operation for manufacturing industry today and will do so for retailing and for service industries on 16th February.

I congratulate the Government on reaching agreement with the Confederation of British Industries and with the Retail Consortium. What reactions have the Government received from the Trades Union Congress and consumer organisations? Despite the rise in the price of potatoes, in view of the Government's success in keeping down prices generally, when may we expect an announcement from the Government that they intend to launch a major publicity campaign to make housewives aware of the scheme?

The response from the TUC and the consumer groups, unlike that from the Opposition, has been favourable. Publicity will be geared to the starting of the scheme at the retail level and will not, therefore, be starting immediately—otherwise, in the interim period it would raise hopes which would not be justified.

What arrangements have been made by the Department to control prices charged by the nationalised industries?

My right hon. Friend indicated last week that we are not talking of controlling prices; we are entering into a voluntary agreement. The public sector, like the private sector, has been asked to consider what contribution it can make to this agreement, and in due course the full list will be announced.

In view of the importance of fuel and postage costs in the household budget, will my hon. Friend explain how it is that private industry has voluntarily entered into such an agreement whilst publicly-owned industries, which are the direct responsibility of my right hon. Friends, have appeared to be reluctant to do so?

My hon. Friend cannot have read the statement made by my right hon. Friend, when she made it clear that the public sector will be cooperating. My hon. Friend will recognise that in a situation of soaring international energy prices we have to aim at viability in our energy prices.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the Question asked by the hon. Member for Aberdare (Mr. Evans), unlike the potato, appears to have been well planted and is not a very typical reaction? Will he confirm that many of the items included in the list would not have risen by 5 per cent. in price anyway? Will he therefore answer the question that the Secretary of State did not answer recently, about what the effect of the scheme will be on the index of retail prices?

If my hon. Friend's Question were planted—it would surprise me if it had been—all I can say is that it has yielded a very good crop, unlike last year's potatoes. It is impossible to predict the price index in advance. [HON. MEMBERS: "Ah!"] Clearly hon. Members expect that one should have a crystal ball when one stands at the Dispatch Box.

On a point of order, Mr. Speaker. An hon. Gentleman on the Opposition Front Bench has alleged that my Question was planted. May that remark be withdrawn? I have had no contact with the Department, and this Question appeared on the Order Paper before my right hon. Friend's statement last week. Will the hon. Gentleman withdraw his imputation?

Further to that point of order, Mr. Speaker. In accordance with my usual habit, I withdraw the allegation.

Whether or not the allegation was well founded, this is rather a waste of time.

Will the Minister of State confirm that only 20 per cent. of all goods are affected by the price restraint scheme? Does he agree that the average housewife, doing the normal amount of shopping, will hardly benefit from it at all?

A scheme that covers between 15 per cent. and 20 per cent. of goods is a marked contribution. The subsidy scheme and the previous price restraint scheme were beneficial. I am surprised that the Opposition should be carping at a scheme that is so extensive.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what were the annual, six-monthly and three-monthly rates of inflation at the last available date.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what the 12-month increase in the retail price index is.

The year-on-year figure for the all-items index in December was 24·9 per cent.; the three-months' figure for all items was 3·9 per cent., or 18·1 per cent. expressed at an annual rate; the six-months' figure for the all-items index was 6·5 per cent. or 14 per cent. expressed at an annual rate.

In the forthcoming and present negotiations with the TUC about the successor to the £6 pay limit, how categoric do the Government feel able to be about achieving the Chancellor of the Exchequer's target of single-figure inflation by the end of the year?

The Government are satisfied that the country is on target to achieve the levels of inflation adumbrated in the White Paper. It is undeniable that the trends to which I have referred are encouraging. They are supported by the independent evidence of the Price Commission in its most recent quarterly report.

Does the hon. Gentleman recognise that the £6 incomes limit, which is inflationary, has the effect of transferring resources out of children's mouths? What action will the Government take to rectify this situation, or to bring it to the attention of the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Prime Minister?

The hon. Member is somewhat obscure. The £6 pay limit is working most effectively to bring down the cost of living in this country, which must be of benefit to children, old people and, indeed, all people alike. Measures that the Government have taken to subsidise food, particularly milk, are of special help to children.

Although the Under-Secretary has called in aid the Price Commission's report concerning the rate of inflation, is he aware that the Commission also states that 50 per cent. of our import bill is due to the depreciation of sterling? How are the Government going to put that right?

By succeeding in our counter-inflation policy.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what action she proposes to take to halt recent increases in the price of food.

As my right hon. Friend announced in the House on 27th January, the selective price restraint scheme for the retail sector will come into operation on 16th February. An important feature of the scheme is the inclusion of certain food items on which price increases will be limited to 5 per cent. over six months.

Will my hon. Friend explain in some detail the reference by my right hon. Friend, in her statement on the price restraint scheme, to safeguards on the part of particular firms, allowing them the possibility of withdrawing from the scheme? Why cannot the 5 per cent. ceiling, particularly on basic foodstuffs, be rigorously imposed, especially at a time when workers are having a rigid ceiling imposed on their wage increases?

My hon. Friend understands these matters well and he will appreciate that were we not to permit the substantial cost increases borne by industry to be reflected in price increases it would greatly exacerbate the present unacceptable level of unemployment. The food industry has felt able to bring forward a substantial number of important items which will fall within the scheme. We do not expect that there will be any need for withdrawals in respect of those items, or in respect of the general undertaking on fresh foods that certain items will be the subject of rotating promotions.

The Minister has already said that overcoming inflation depends on the Government's counter-inflation policy. Does he not agree that it also depends on strengthening our currency, which, in turn, is dependent on the Government's diminishing their public sector borrowing requirement? How will they do that when, to advertise the price restraint scheme, they have a scheme that will cost almost £1 million, nearly half of which is for issuing little price tag kits and the postage involved? Is it not appalling that such a waste of money should be proposed at a time like this?

The hon. Lady astonishes me. She is usually anxious that consumers should understand the steps being taken by the Government to benefit them directly. She has constantly urged the improved display of prices and unit pricing. I do not understand why she should boggle at a sum of money that represents less than 1p per head of the population to give publicity to a scheme that will be of universal benefit.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what is the estimated cost of the planned investigation by the Office of Fair Trading into computer dating.

This is a matter for the Director General of Fair Trading. The hon. Member may care to write to him about it.

Regardless of the sum spent, does the hon. Gentleman not agree that this is a great waste of public money? Does he not further agree that it is surely not the job of the taxpayer to subsidise those who have faith in this form of electronic roulette? If there is any question of fraudulent practice by computer dating firms, surely redress should be sought through the courts?

Some unfortunate members of the public do not share the hon. Member's dashing good looks and therefore need assistance. Very lonely people have been exploited and, in some cases, fees of up to £100 have been paid for which virtually no service has been provided. It is for the Office of Fair Trading to decide whether it wishes to investigate. The Office is independent, and it not for me to interfere with its activities.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she will estimate the total cost to the consumer of the recent oil price increases.

If the full permitted increases are passed on, it is estimated that this will eventually raise the retail price index by 1 per cent.

The Minister has indicated that this will inevitably work its way through the system. Can he say how oil price increases will affect the Government's counter-inflation policy—because, for many households, the price of oil is a very important cost?

The impact on the retail price index will be as I have indicated, unless competitive pressures hold down the price below 1 per cent. There is strong competition within the industry, which may have that effect. The hon. Member is right to draw attention to the difficulties that recurrent oil price increases create for Governments, both here and in other industrially developed countries.

What consideration has my hon. Friend given to the confusion now facing motorists outside petrol stations, where they see signs such as "Tenfold Stamps" or "7p off the Marked Price", and other incentives to buy petrol? What consultations is my hon. Friend having with the trade to ensure that the motorist knows what he is paying for his petrol?

My hon. Friend the Minister of State will have a meeting on Wednesday with the Petrol Retailers' Association and the Motor Agents' Association, when this matter will be raised.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection whether any Government legislation is planned which will affect the costs of distributors.

As far as my own Department is concerned, I am aware of no legislation which will increase distributors' costs.

Surely the Secretary of State is a supporter of the Dock Work Regulation Bill. Since many trade associations have proved that the Bill will increase costs, does the Minister believe that it is within the Department's jurisdiction to support this measure? In view of the consumer protection angle, concerning food supplies, what is the Department planning to do about it?

I am aware of the strength of feeling about the possible implications of the scheme, but we should not anticipate the forthcoming proceedings on the Bill.

Does my hon. Friend agree that there is a need for an inquiry into the whole problem of distribution, including the number of stages involved between the producer and the final consumer? If we cut out the unnecessary stages we should be able to reduce some of the excess profits that are being made.

I doubt whether the purposes that my hon. Friend has in mind would be served by a general inquiry into distribution, although there have been specific inquiries. One, for example, was conducted into the distribution of meat, and there is currently another into the distribution of fish, which should throw a light on to the points that my hon. Friend is making.

Has the Minister seen estimates that the extension of the dock labour scheme could add more than £1·5 million to the price of food? Does he accept that there is no reason for introducing this legislation that could be remotely in the interests of consumers?

I am aware that the legislation is controversial.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what representations have been made by food manufacturers about the unresolved problems arising from the forthcoming introduction of metric units for prepackaged foods.

We are in constant touch with the food industry on general metrication problems. The Food Manufacturers' Federation wrote to my Department on 19th December saying that it wished to discuss the question of legal cutoff dates for imperial sizes of prescribed quantity foods. A meeting with the Federation has been arranged for 5th February.

Is the Minister aware of the concern felt by the food industry about the possible confusion that could arise after 1st April 1978 by the presence on the shelves, in various shops, of imported packages in metric weights, as against those in imperial weights, and packed according to average net weight rather than minimum net weight, as at present in this country? Will he hasten forward measures to bring individual packaging into line?

I appreciate the risks of confusion. Because of that we are considering bringing forward an amendment to Section 10 (10) of the Weights and Measures Act.

Has the Minister seen the draft Directive R/3070 from the Community, which proposes to abolish all imperial measurements? Do the Government intend merely to accept that?

I think that the Select Committee has asked for a memorandum on that, and it is being put forward.

In the unfortunate move towards metric measurement, may we be assured that the British pint will not disappear?

I have given an assurance on numerous occasions that there is no reason for the British pint to disappear. I remind the hon. Member that his party was involved in advancing metrication.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what response from the local authorities she has received on her allocation of grants for the setting up of consumer advice centres.

The applications that we received from local authorities considerably exceeded the total funds available for grants, and the whole of the £1·4 million available has been allocated.

Does the Minister think that it is a correct order of priorities to advance extra public expenditure to this programme at this time, when there will clearly be wide cuts in public expenditure programmes, including those concerned with more worthy social causes? Is he aware that there has been widespread opposition to the programme, including from consumers and housewives? Does he realise that it is widely regarded as a political sop and a gimmick? Will he give an assurance that grants will not continue beyond March 1977, and that those local authorities which take them up will have to bear the full cost thereafter?

It has been indicated to the authorities concerned that they will have to bear the cost beyond that date. However, they will be receiving rate support grant, so the Government will still be carrying the major share of the cost. We believe that the development of the network of advice centres is valuable and must be seen in the context of a feed-in service of information for the Office of Fair Trading.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the response from both the local authorities and the public to this new extension of consumer protection is most gratifying? Does he agree that much of the opposition that manifests itself in local authorities and elsewhere comes from commercial interests, which may not have any particular reason to welcome this extension of countervailing power?

Inevitably some people in the retail trade misunderstand what is happening when advice centres are developed in specific areas. Our experience is that after the centres have been in operation for a short while retailers find them a valuable source of information and fair arbitrators in the event of a dispute.

We despair of writing letters to the Minister, because we get so little action from the Government when we write to them. Does the Minister realise that any burden that is put upon the ratepayers—and this scheme will be such a burden—is bound to lead to severe criticism of the Government? It is for that reason that the public do not want to be wrapped up in cotton wool. They want more competition and not the kind of Socialism that we are getting.

The hon. Gentleman does not seem to realise how valuable these centres are. In Croydon, in the first 12 months, a centre recouped about £35,000 in compensation for consumers. In Aberdare, a small centre recouped about £15,000 in eight months. In Yorkshire, consumer offices have recouped over £100,000 on behalf of consumers. The hon. Member should not, therefore, suggest that we are providing cotton wool. We are obviously providing a necessary service to consumers.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the £1·4 million will be extremely well spent? It represented part of Labour's programme in 1973, when we said that we would provide local offices to which consumers could turn when they were being cheated or deceived by retailers. Is it possible for the Government urgently to consider increasing the £1·4 million, so that every town with a population of, say, more than 50,000 would be included—not excluding places like Keighley?

Naturally, we should like to extend the scheme even further. I take note of my hon. Friend's pleading for his own constituency. However, I should be misleading the House if I suggested that more funds would be available at this stage. Later, however, we hope to build further upon this network.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection if she is satisfied with the operation of the law relating to pyramid selling, particularly in view of the evidence submitted to her by the hon. Member for Plymouth, Drake.

I am at present satisfied that this legislation is effective. I am aware of the report in a recent BBC television programme, to which I understand the hon. Member is referring, and I am having further inquiries made.

Will the Minister take urgent action on this matter, since it was quite clear from the programme that there is a considerable conning of people, which should be stopped?

I could hardly have taken more urgent action. The transcript was on my desk within 24 hours of the programme appearing and officials were asked immediately to investigate the matter. They are examining it with advice from solicitors, to decide whether or not it is a breach of the Act. Obviously I cannot give a decision at this stage.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection what study she has made of the evidence supplied to her of the sale of a number of dangerous animal toys designed for young children; what figures are available for accidents arising from dangerous toys; if she will give breakdowns revealing the sources of danger; and if she will make a statement.

The evidence provided indicates that the toy animals may not comply with the Toys (Safety) Regulations 1974. I understand that appropriate action is being taken by the local authority concerned, which is responsible for the enforcement of the regulations.

Is my hon. Friend aware that the latter part of the answer causes some concern, and perhaps some attempt should therefore be made to obtain this sort of statistics? Will he consider the question of garages selling toys of this type? There is an obvious danger when a child is playing in the back set of a car with a toy from which the eyes may be detachable. Will my hon. Friend investigate the whole question of garages selling such objects?

There is no necessity for us to investigate garage selling, as, like any other outlet, garages are covered by the safety regulations. In so far as they are in breach of those regulations, they lay themselves open to prosecution. As to statistics, my hon. Friend will know that in the near future we are producing a consultative document on the safety of goods and safety in the home. If he has any points that he wishes to raise in relation to that, we shall be glad to hear from him. We have limited statistics. A special surveillance system has been developed over a period of years, based on about six hospitals and covering about 2 million people. From that we are getting a figure for accidents of just over 100 in a year. In some instances an accident may be caused by a child standing on a toy and falling off, rather than by the toy itself.

I recognise the need to protect children, but will the Minister make it clear that, incredible though it may seem, the prime responsibility still remains with parents?

Yes, of course, the responsibility remains with parents, in so far as it is possible for them to exercise meaningful judgment, but we all know that there are toys in which the hazards are concealed, when, no matter how diligent the parent it is impossible to anticipate those hazards. The Government must try to give protection in those circumstances.

Does the Minister recall that I have written to him and his Department on several occasions about dangerous toys imported from Hong Kong? What action is taken to scrutinise imported toys to ensure that they are safe?

Imported toys are subject to the same procedures as are domestically produced toys in the event of their being in breach of the regulations. It is a physical impossibility literally to inspect every toy for every form of hazard, just as it is impossible to inspect all domestically produced toys in that way. Imported toys are subject to the same general regulations and general scrutinies as are domestically produced toys. In the same way as we approach manufacturers in this country for their voluntary co-operation, when we find problems with imported toys we usually find it satisfactory to go, for example, to the Hong Kong Government who pass on our representation to the manufacturers, who usually make the necessary modifications.

asked the Secretary of State for Prices and Consumer Protection when she expects the latest Price Commission report to be published; and if she will make a statement.

The latest report was published on 22nd January and covered the three months September to November 1975. The hon. Member will be happy to know that the report concludes that there is now ample evidence that the rate of inflation is slowing down.

Has the Minister noted from the report that profit margins in major industries such as engineering, motor vehicles, chemicals, textiles, print and paper are down to 37 per cent. of the Government's ceiling? What action are the Government taking to assist the profitability of these industries, in the interests of new investment and more jobs?

I have noted that profit margins are standing at a lower level than at any time since price control was introduced. A year ago the Government announced an important investment relief, and the Price Commission's latest quarterly report indicates that the take-up of this relief has increased considerably and now amounts to £1,806 million, thus permitting an increase in prices and profits of £348 million, as a contribution towards financing investment.

Has the Minister seen the reports in the newspapers this morning that the Government are thinking of extending the rôle of the Price Commission on prices, and possibly to the regulation or supervision of wages? Is that in the Government's thinking, or is it an unofficial leak?

The whole question of the future of the Price Commission is under consideration, along with the question how the counter-inflationary policy should be developed beyond the current phase. I also noted that this morning the Financial Times survey of business news attributed the decline in profits to the current recession and the difficulties in the market situation.

Just in case there is any Government thinking in relation to the control of wages, will my hon. Friend indicate to his hon. and right hon. Friends that it will not be "on" with my hon. Friends?

The Government's view is that the current policy on prices and wages is working exceedingly well. It will be upon the success of that policy that we shall build.

The Under-Secretary of State is extremely sanguine about prices. Is he aware that a couple of weeks ago the Grocer index showed a record year-on-year increase in grocery prices and a record weekly increase in 713 items? Will the Minister have the honesty to tell the House that, despite any dreams of hocus-pocus price restraints that his Department may have, he has no scope to do anything whatsoever about these prices, because of the extent to which profit margins have been eroded in the retail food trade, partly because of the Price Code and partly because of a pay settlement, within the Government's limits, which amounted to 20 per cent.?

The hon. Lady accuses me of being sanguine—and, I take it, over-sanguine. The facts are clear. There has been a decline in the rate of inflation in the price of food, excluding seasonal foods, in each of the last six months. That must be set beside any reports from unofficial sources that she cares to bring before us. As to the hon. Lady's strictures about lack of scope for the effective restraint of prices, the food and drink industry has proved co-operative in its contribution to the selective price restraint scheme. We recognise that this was not easy for the industry. None the less, its contribution is substantial and real.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he is satisfied with the progress of negotiations with oil companies for State participation in their offshore oil activities.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what further progress he has made in the participation proposals with the oil companies in regard to North Sea oil.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether he will make a further statement on the progress of his negotiations on participation with the oil companies.

Satisfactory progress is continuing towards the first detailed agreements with companies that have accepted the principle of majority State participation. Useful discussions are also being held with a number of other companies, and I shall keep the House informed of further progress.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the equity offer today of £76 million for North Sea oil development shows that where the proposition is sound it is possible to raise funds without Government assistance? Is he further aware that he must be regarded as Father Christmas by a number of oil companies that might otherwise have difficulty in raising funds? Will he tell us clearly the amount that the British taxpayer will have to pay for the policy of participation by the time he has finished dealing with the "Riccardos" of the oil industry?

The hon. Gentleman referred, first, to the recent prospectuses. That experience proves—or I hope that it will prove—that private money can be forthcoming in the ordinary way to finance useful development in the North Sea. It should also prove that public participation is not an impediment to the progress of these efforts, contrary to the gloomy predictions of Opposition Members.

May I say to you, Mr. Speaker, in your last Question Time, that it would not come amiss from me and from my colleagues below the Gangway, to thank you for the part you played in getting my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster to come along and answer Questions? While I am about it, may I ask my right hon. Friend whether he accepts that what he has managed to achieve in negotiating this participation with various oil companies has been a relatively easy exercise up to now, because he has been negotiating, by and large, with Government Departments directly or indirectly in the name of BP, Burmah Oil, and the NCB-controlled areas? What will he do if, for example, American or German companies refuse to accept participation, in contrast with the cases that he has already dealt with?

I am glad, Mr. Speaker, that any effort you have made has resulted in my being here, and I am also glad that this successful effort is well regarded by my colleagues.

More's the pity.

My hon. Friends cannot have it both ways. They cannot argue, on the one hand, that BP should have independence of commercial operation and, on the other, assume that it is a Government Department for the purposes of negotiation. It is an entirely independent company, in the way that has been frequently explained in the House. Apart from the companies that I have mentioned, we are having very promising discussions with a great many other companies. I think that my hon. Friend the Member for Bolsover (Mr. Skinner) will be agreeably surprised, if he can contain himself with reasonable patience, having regard to the crucial character of these assets for the people who are operating in the area and for the enormous sums of money they have to put in. If my hon. Friend will have a little patience, he will give me time to reconcile the legitimate interests of the Government and the British people and the legitimate interests of the oil companies.

Whether compliments come from expected or unexpected quarters, I think that on my penultimate day it would be inappropriate to acknowledge them.

Will my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster comment on the letter of 20th January from the Department of Energy to the London and Scottish Marine Oil Company stating that our 51 per cent. participation in the Ninian Field would still not entitle the British National Oil Corporation to take into ownership any assets, and that if the Corporation wanted 51 per cent. of the oil it would have to pay the full market price for it? Is this typical of the kind of participation that my right hon. Friend is negotiating? If so, what is the point of such a sell-out?

My hon. Friend calls it a sell-out. The agreement he has mentioned is certainly one that relates well to the particular circumstances of the companies concerned. The effect is that we will have a vote on the operating committee, an option to buy 51 per cent. of the oil, and a title to 51 per cent. of the operation. If my hon. Friend desires that my negotiations should result in acquiring the right to compel companies to sell us their assets at below cost, he has the wrong negotiator.

Will the right hon. Gentleman give an assurance that in any future negotiations that he has about participation he will be guided by his own experience and business acumen, and will pay scant attention to the advice that he receives from below the Gangway on his own side of the House?

I cannot say that I find the advice and comment that I get from my hon. Friends below the Gangway wholly unrewarding, but I must tell them, and, indeed, the whole House, that my duty is to conduct these negotiations in a way that will both fulfil the interests of the Government and the British people and reconcile those interests with the legitimate rights and obligations of the oil companies that are engaged in this vast, expensive and hazardous operation.

asked the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what recent consultations he has had with the Chairman of the British National Oil Corporation on the progress he is making with oil companies for 51 per cent. State control of offshore oil interests.

I keep in close touch with the Chairman of the BNOC about progress in the participation negotiations.

As the Treasury, mercifully, now appears to have said that there will be no cash for these negotiations, and that the currency for nationalisation is going to be oil options, why does the right hon. Gentleman not admit that the whole business is a sham and that the BNOC ought to be conducting these negotiations in any case, since it will be responsible for managing the botched-up participation when the right hon. Gentleman has finished with it?

The hon. Gentleman and his hon. Friends cannot have it both ways. If it is a sham, it would be harmless, although repulsive. In fact, it is not a sham and it is not harmful. What we are doing is ensuring that we have a flexible option and ownership rights over a vast amount of oil in the North Sea; that we shall have an effective voice in the operations at relevant points in the North Sea; and that we are adding to the commercial experience of the BNOC for the North Sea future. That is not a sham. The participation agreements that we are reaching will have tangible and real advantages for the British people.

Question No. 42.

Too late, I am afraid.