asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement on the recommendation of the Working Party on the Film Industry as set out in Command Paper No. 6372.

I refer the hon. Member to the answer that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister gave on 14th January. I have nothing further to add at this time.

Has the Minister especially noted that British films are singularly suitable export material, given the minimum of raw materials required and the abundance of creative talent available? Will he do all possible to give maximum assistance to this aspect of the industry's work?

I entirely agree with the hon. Gentleman that this country has a splendid talent for making films. We also have the great advantage of speaking a language that is widely understood in many continents. Therefore, there is a considerable opportunity and potential for the British film-making industry.

In the talks which I know he must be planning to hold with the British film industry, will my right hon. Friend be kind enough to make clear that this is probably one of the last chances we shall have of maintaining the industry in its existing form? We hope that there will be a great deal of imagination and new thinking when the new authority is set up, because the audiovisual arts provide one of the most important ways in which we can develop not only the cultural but the commercial interests of this industry.

I know that my hon. Friend has followed closely the developments of the British film industry and that in the past she has had ministerial responsibility for it. I think she will agree that the report—which, of course, we have not yet properly studied—is evidence that there has been new thinking that the industry is aware of the urgency of the present situation, and that this may be a most important opportunity to safeguard its future.

Does the Secretary of State agree that at least part of the answer to the film industry's problems is to encourage the free collaboration that already exists among the film industry and the BBC and ITV companies?

Yes, I think that is a very important aspect. Indeed, one of the rather striking features of the report is its reference to the coming together of the rather separate interests in film making—television on the one hand and cinema on the other—and the substantial agreement which they have reached.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he is satisfied that subsidised freight slashing by Eastern bloc shipping lines does not constitute dumping.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what assessment he has made of the extent and effect of subsidised freight rate slashing by Eastern bloc countries on British shipowners.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he is satisfied that existing anti-dumping legislation is adequate to prevent the offering by foreign concerns of services, such as shipping, at less than cost.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is satisfied that Eastern bloc shipping lines are competing for cargo on a fair basis.

We have received representations which are being studied urgently and we are consulting with interested parties both at home and abroad. In any event, dumping, as defined by our legislation, applies only to goods and not to services.

Will the Minister confirm that British shipowners are not the only ones to be affected by these practices and that representations have been made to the inter-departmental consultative shipping group by national shipowners' associations from Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom?

Order. I am always sorry to interrupt a lady, but if the preamble could be dealt with and the Question put quicker it would assist us all.

I accept your rebuke, Mr. Speaker. I merely ask the Minister whether it is true that there is worldwide concern about this matter.

Yes; widespread anxiety is felt by shipowners and, indeed, Governments. However, it is right that we should carry out a careful assessment of the position and seek, as far as we can, a co-ordinated approach in order to resolve the problem.

Will my right hon. Friend consider this problem most seriously? Is he aware that there is plenty of evidence that in certain cases rates are being undercut by as much as 25 per cent. and that the jobs of many British seamen will be threatened if this continues?

Yes, we are very concerned. Indeed, it is for that reason that my Department and I are concerned to carry out a careful assessment of the position. As I indicated to the hon. Member for Birmingham, Edgbaston (Mrs. Knight), it is right that as far as possible there should be a joint approach on these matters rather than simply a bilateral exchange.

Will the Minister try to deal with the difficult problem of flag discrimination by making certain that British and other Western shipowners have access to Russian liner cargoes, in the same way as the Russians have access to ours?

That, of course, is more easily said than done. In this matter we also have to take into account the views of our exporters. We should not jump into making a rash judgment. I hope the House will consider that what I have already outlined as the Department's policy is a correct and sensible one.

Will my hon. Friend take into account the fact that these subsidies apply not only to shipping but to electronics, leather goods, textiles, electrical engineering and many other items, all of which, as a sum total, seem to represent a conspiracy to destroy Western economies? Will he take this matter very seriously and, if necessary, consult other Governments?

I think that it is all too easy to rush into a widespread denunciation. One has to examine each practice on its own merits or demerits, as the case may be—and that, of course, is what my Department does. On aspects other than shipping, I have no doubt that my hon. Friend has already made, or will be making, representations to my right hon. Friend.

Will the hon. Gentleman confirm that he has strong reserve powers under Part III of the Merchant Shipping Act 1974 by means of which he can even prevent foreign vessels calling at British ports? In accepting the need for joint action, is the hon. Gentleman consulting other Western nations which have similar powers?

We are having consultations with other Western nations which may be affected by this threat. Whether all of them have reserve powers similar to ours I would not like to hazard a guess. As was outlined by the hon. Member for Henley (Mr. Heseltine), who was then in charge of the Department, there can be no doubt that our reserve powers were intended by the Conservative Government as a policy of last resort. That has to be taken into account, because they are very Draconian powers.

Will my hon. Friend accept from me that we on the Government side deplore dumping from wherever it comes? At the same time, when there is talk of distortion of Western economies taking place, as though in a conspiracy, will my hon. Friend also accept from me that I, with many of my hon. Friends in Sheffield, have been approached by shop stewards' committees and factories about the dumping of Japanese steel, which distorts the economy of that steel city? Will he also take that into account?

As a matter of general principle, dumping is to be deplored. My right hon. Friend has constantly given the Government's policy on the subject. I do not want to enter into a philosophical discussion about the demerits of certain conspiracies, because I think that it would take more than Question Time to get through it.

Has the hon. Gentleman considered what is the motivation behind the slashing of shipping rates by the Eastern bloc? Is he happy that its actions are within the spirit of the Helsinki détente?

If I were happy about the situation I would not be engaged in the discussions which I have already outlined. It is, of course, a matter for concern. I would not like to think that anyone was complacent about a matter in respect of which the shipowners feel very strongly and have made representations to a large number of hon. Members.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what further action is proposed to promote exports and to restrict imports.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he now proposes to take further measures to control imports.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will undertake not to introduce import controls.

My right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer explained the Government's policy on import controls in the House on 17th December. As regards exports, the Government and the British Overseas Trade Board will continue to give their full support to the efforts of British exporters.

As, despite the world economic recession, we are improving our share of world trade, what action will the Government take to stimulate exports now that the long-term objective of export-led growth seems possible in the near future?

The Government have taken both general and specific measures to increase the movement of resources into exports. That, after all, is the primary aim of the Government's economic policy. As my hon. Friend is aware, in the last 12 months we have introduced, especially through the ECGD, a whole range of facilities designed to assist British exporters in important and developing markets.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware of the continuing problems of the textile industry? Is he further aware that it has one of the finest records of output per head of all manufacturing concerns? Because of the continuing crisis in the industry, will he give further consideration to quantitative controls and the long-term regulator that the industry so desperately requires?

I am very conscious of the problems of the textile industry. Indeed, Members on both sides of the House who represent textile areas have spoken most strongly, and continue to do so, in the interests of that industry. But we have taken certain measures to help deal with the serious growth of imports, particularly in relation to yarn imports from Spain and Portugal. At last we have got into place the extensive quantitative control of exports from most of the low-cost producing countries under the Multi-fibre Agreement.

Following the meeting in December with trade unionists from the Scottish chipboard industry, including those from Cowie, in my constituency, and in view of the concern expressed about jobs, what steps is my right hon. Friend taking to control imports of chipboard?

There have been continuing discussions on the problem of chipboard. My hon. Friend has taken part, with my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State, in a recent discussion about the matter. There is not at present an antidumping proposal before us. What we have advised the industry to do—and I gather that it has had some success in this—is to reach agreement with suppliers from some of the countries from which the pressure is greatest in order to regulate any unnecessary or excessive flow of exports to the United Kingdom.

Is it not absurdly shortsighted of the Government to pursue a trade policy in relation to the Soviet Union and other Communist countries whereby exports from this country are provided to them on financial terms far more favourable than our own industries can obtain, and then to take no action against dumped exports from those countries, which then arrive here and further jeopardise our own industries? I refer in particular to the export of textile machinery and the dumping of textile products.

I am surprised that the hon. Gentleman has put his question in that way. As he knows, in the case of chipboard the strongest pressure on the British industry arises from Belgian exports. In so far as there is an East European export problem, we have got both a price and a volume undertaking and an understanding with the Romanians in this sector.

I remind both Front Benches that this is not debating time and that they ought to make their points more briefly.

What discussions has the right hon. Gentleman had with the Scotch Whisky Association about import restrictions? Does he not agree that too much import restriction may lead to retaliatory action, which would damage the industry and its employees?

I shall bear that point in mind, but I have not had recent discussions with the Scotch Whisky Association on export-import problems.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he expects the inquiry into the mid-air collision involving a civil Piper Aztec aircraft on 7th January off the east coast of England to be complete.

It is impossible to forecast what problems the inspector's investigation will encounter in the course of the inquiry, but I am advised that the Chief Inspector of Accidents expects to be able to submit the report on the accident before the end of summer this year.

Will the Minister confirm that this will be a joint military and civil inquiry? May I remind him of the disquiet that has arisen because of the lack of publication of the military side of such inquiries? Will he ensure that on this occasion nothing will be concealed unless required by security?

This inquiry was undertaken by the Accident Investigation Branch of the Department of Trade and also by the Royal Air Force Board of Inquiry.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade when he last met the Chairman of the English Tourist Board.

On 28th January.

Did the right hon. Gentleman discuss with the Chairman of the Board—and if he did not, will he?—the present arrangement by which financial assistance for tourist projects from the three principal Boards is limited to the development areas? Does the right hon. Gentleman think that "Come to sunny Skelmersdale for your summer holidays" is a good slogan—with all respect to Skelmersdale?

Resources are at present severely limited. Given the wide range of areas that are now scheduled as development areas, it makes sense to concentrate what resources there are on promoting tourism in those areas.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether his Department's investigations into London and County Securities Limited is due to be published; and if he will make a statement.

The report was published on 29th January 1976.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that the report was buried by another Press romp which came out on the same day? Is he prepared to comment on the statement in the report that leading politicians should not become involved in these matters? If, in fact, politicians should not become involved in these institutions, is it not right that nobody should become involved in the setting up of these secondary banks? Will my right hon. Friend introduce legislation to outlaw the practice?

My hon. Friend has drawn attention to the findings of the inspectors, and it is true that they spoke of it as a cautionary tale for politicians. As for the more general question of part-time directors, I am certain that what the inspectors said has a much wider relevance. The whole report——in common, incidentally, with other recent reports from the Department of Trade—indicates clearly the need for much stronger regulating powers not only in the company sector generally but specifically in relation to secondary banks.

Does the right hon. Gentleman accept that one of the worst features of the affair—apart from the fact that the shareholders lost all their money, which has been seldom pointed out—is the fact that the auditors passed the accounts of this organisation? Will the right hon. Gentleman hold consultations with the accountancy profession to see that proper accounting standards, common throughout the profession, are soon adopted?

The report contains several references to the role of the auditors at different stages. There were several different accounting and auditing exercises, as the hon. Gentleman will recall. On some of these the report had critical remarks to make. As I understand it, it is the practice of the professional accountancy bodies to set up a sub-committee whenever auditors are criticised by the Department and in a report. They are doing so in this case.

Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, according to the inspectors' finding, the auditors were repeatedly deceived by Mr. Caplan, although the same distinguished firm remained auditors to the company up to the time of the crash?

I am aware of that. As I say, it is important to distinguish between two different stages at which the auditors were involved. In reference to some of the activities the auditors are criticised to some extent by the inspectors. In other activities in which they were engaged they are not criticised. However, I take what the hon. Gentleman said. As the report indicates, the auditors were dealing with an extraordinary degree of deception and deviousness.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will now take necessary steps to prevent the unfair competition arising from the importation of large numbers of low-priced electrical goods such as toasters, irons and hair driers which are causing short-term working and the threat of redundancies at the Hotpoint Plant, Swinton, Mexborough; and if he will make a statement.

I have received no evidence of unfair competition arising from the importation of such goods.

That is a dusty answer. Does my hon. Friend realise that several small factories have been closed in South Yorkshire in the last two or three years, but that this is not a small factory? It is a large one. Is he further aware that a tremendous amount of money has been spent trying to modernise it? Indeed, it is going through that phase at the moment. Does my hon. Friend want this factory to close down, creating great unemployment in the Mexborough district? If the Department cannot find any evidence to prove that imports are below the figure that we say they should be, and if the Department cannot restrict imports, will the Minister tell the owner of the factory what the Government will do in order to make certain that the factory can be viable?

We have had no request from this industry for action either to impose import controls or to initiate antidumping action. The initiative surely rests with the industry. I would point out that although import penetration has increased with hair driers it has fallen in the other two categories, namely toasters and irons.

Is not the problem the imposition of 25 per cent. VAT on these items? Is the Minister aware that in my constituency of Hastings we have had hundreds of redundancies because no attention has been paid to the need to protect the employment of people who ought to be in work producing goods that are required in the United Kingdom market?

I remind the hon. Gentleman that value added tax is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exechequer.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement about negotiations to enable Concorde services to be extended to routes other than London—Bahrain.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what success he has achieved in securing overflying and landing rights for Concorde.

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

I made a statement to the House on 5th February on Mr. Secretary Coleman's decision to allow British Airways to operate scheduled services to New York and Washington for a trial period of 16 months. Discussions are continuing with other countries on the proposed services to Melbourne and Tokyo, and further statements will be made at the appropriate times.

Will the right hon. Gentleman say how negotiations for overflying rights are going with India? Will he hazard a guess on the question which will be the next Concorde service?

I would rather not hazard a guess at the present time. We are having continuing discussions with the Indian Government. As I said earlier, when I reach a point at which I believe I can make a statement I shall do so.

Has the Secretary of State started negotiations with the Soviet Union concerning overflying rights? Will he say whether any discussions have been started with regard to the TU144s flying into Heathrow?

We and the French are in discussion with the Soviet Union about a supersonic corridor and a refuelling stop inside their area. I am not aware of any application by the Soviet airline to fly into Heathrow.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell any other Governments who may seek to use Concorde as an excuse to involve themselves in unrelated issues in discussion with Her Majesty's Government that such tactics are counterproductive, particularly if they seek to stifle criticism of current events in any of those countries?

The hon. Gentleman clearly has some serious matter on his mind which he has not felt it proper to reveal to the House. However, I take note of what he said, and if he wants a private word with me I shall be available.

Bearing in mind that landing rights at Kennedy Airport, New York, are quite crucial to the commercial success of Concorde, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether the Government have had discussions with the state or city authorities of New York about the possibility of Concorde landing hold-ups from those quarters?

The Government have not had discussions with those authorities, but Air France and British Airways made immediate applications to the controlling authorities of both Dulles and Kennedy Airports.

Is it correct to say that some consideration has been given to flying Concorde to Johannesburg? If I am correct in suggesting that a difficulty in that regard is the overflying of Nigeria, will the right hon. Gentleman say whether discussions are proceeding with that Government with a view to solving the problem?

We have to face questions of routes one at a time. It is true that within the reserve list of routes there is one to Johannesburg, but we are pressing ahead, as is only sensible, with the priority routes. After all, we have been making some progress recently.

Will my right hon. Friend accept from me that there is no great enthusiasm for the extension of this illogical plane? Will he say how it fits in with the Government's policy of saving energy, when it is one of the most thirsty planes to be developed? Will my right hon. Friend make it clear that he will resist any further absurd attempt to produce a stretched version, thereby pouring more public money into the biggest white elephant that the taxpayer has yet seen?

s: My hon. Friend has a point of view to which he is entitled, and which he has already expressed vigorously in the House. Any decision about the development of a stretched version is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Industry. All I can say beyond that is that while I note my hon. Friend's lack of enthusiasm I, personally, feel somewhat differently, especially as we have gained a favourable judgment from Secretary Coleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if action is being taken to limit export credits following the Rambouillet Summit.

Negotiations to achieve greater control over international credit competition were given fresh impetus by the decision of Heads of Government at Rambouillet that efforts should be intensified to bring them to a prompt conclusion. Discussions are continuing and I hope that they will soon be successfully concluded.

Is it true that, following that meeting, American pressure has been brought upon the Six, which has resulted in an assurance from the Six that all export credits will be withdrawn over a period?

I have not heard of any proposal for the withdrawal of export credits, which I think are almost universally regarded as a valuable feature of export trade.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what progress has been made in negotiations with Eastern European countries on the restriction of woollen imports into the United Kingdom.

Discussions are continuing with the East European countries concerned about the level of their exports of woollen suits to this country.

Is my hon. Friend prepared to accept that the £4·80 suits from East Germany are the latest examples of the flood of cheap woollen imports from Eastern Europe? When will the talking stop and the action start? When will the Government introduce tougher import regulations to stop this country being the softest import market in the world?

I remind the House that a wide range of woollen textiles and garments is already subject to quantitative restrictions when imported from Eastern Europe. We have invited the Governments of five Eastern European countries voluntarily to restrain their sending to us of woollen suits in 1976. This should close the gap which now exists.

Is it not true that Communist countries can obtain textile machinery exported from this country on more favourable terms than those available to the British textile industry?

It is true that textile industries anywhere in the world can obtain textile machinery from this country on credit terms that are internationally recognised and that we have to accept if our prosperous textile machinery indus- try is to make its contribution, which is already very good, to British exports.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that, in view of the wool textile industry's leading position in the country's export league, some of us from the West Riding strongly support the Government's efforts to make a British contribution to world freedom of trade, but that the manifest success of other countries in dumping in this country, with comparative ease, detracts from the Government's main policy?

I was not aware that the Liberal Party was reverting to its former free trade policy, but I am grateful to the hon. Gentleman for that information. We have strong anti-dumping legislation, in line with the GATT code—a code that is universally adopted by OECD countries. I assure the hon. Gentleman—we have recently assured British industry—that any accusations of dumping are vigorously pursued.

Is it not ironical that the Prime Minister goes to Moscow to give the Russians special credit terms featuring low interest rates when such terms are not available to our own manufacturers, making it impossible for them to compete?

I must point out to the House that this is one of the anomalies of international trade. If we are to increase British exports we must give our exporters the same credit facilities as are available to international competitors. The CBI would be the first to protest if we adopted the policy put forward by the hon. Gentleman.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will confirm his intention to publish his White Paper on civil aviation policy before the end of February.

Yes, Sir.

Has the right hon. Gentleman seen the recent words of Mr. Adam Thomson, of British Caledonian, which suggests that before the White Paper is ever produced the whole civil aviation review will be out of date? Would it not be better for the Secretary of State to go back to the drawing board and consider such matters as dual designation, and even the Laker Skytrain?

I have seen many words written by Mr. Adam Thomson. To use the hon. Gentleman's phrase, I do not think it would be right to go back to the drawing board. I think that I must continue, and I hope to be able to report to the House before very long.

I do not want my right hon. Friend to give away all the secrets of the coming White Paper, but will he whisper to me that there will be no paragraph in it which will lead to an increase of flights by night or day to Luton Airport, in the interest of many of my constituents getting a decent night's sleep?

I think I can assure my hon. Friend that Luton Airport does not feature in the White Paper.

Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us whether his White Paper will require legislation for its implementation?

The hon. Gentleman must await the publication of the White Paper for the answer to that question.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade what assistance his Department is giving to the forthcoming trade mission being sent by the Scottish Council (Development and Industry) to the United States of America to coincide with the 200th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

The Scottish Council (Development and Industry) has been informed that members of a mission under its sponsorship visiting the United States of America in September/October this year will be eligible for financial assistance at the appropriate rate under the Outward Mission Scheme administered by the British Overseas Trade Board.

Will the Minister publicly acknowledge the excellent work that has been done for Scottish industry for many years by the Scottish Council, thus showing what can be done by independent Scottish initiative? Well he consider suggesting to the Scottish Council that it takes with it on temporary loan a copy of Scotland's Declaration of Independence, signed at Arbroath six and a half centuries ago, which would be an excellent complement to the Magna Carta, which it also going to the United States?

I think that the hon. Gentleman is referring to the wrong body or the wrong mission. In the United States at this moment there is a Scottish Council mobile exhibition entitled "The Best of Scotland". It is there for the bicentennial. I should have thought that that was the more appropriate organisation and mission to exhibit any historical documents. However, exports are concerned not with history but with our prosperity today and our ability to deliver to the market on time. It is that to which the Scottish exhibition is directed.

Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the success of the Scottish Council is due to the fact that it has direct links with the Department of Trade in London? Will he give an assurance that those direct links will not be broken?

The Council has direct links with my Department for outward missions. For other of its activities it is responsible and answerable to my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Scotland. I believe that is a fair division of responsibility.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is satisfied with the present operation of Section 4 of the Development of Tourism Act 1969 and the additional condition of restricting grants for approved tourist projects to those within development areas.

Within present financial constraints, I am satisfied that the greatest benefits under the scheme can be obtained by concentrating resources on the development areas.

Does the Minister agree that there are regions in the United Kingdom, outside the formal industrial development areas, that require investment by the tourist industry? Would not much more locational selection be possible if the Government were to accept the concept of special tourist development areas?

The present development areas already identify areas of economic development. They are not limited to industrial areas. It is the development areas that need assistance, including tourist assistance. If we were to do what the hon. Gentleman and other hon. Members would like us to do—in other words, to spread available funds over wider areas—we would do so only at the expense of the development areas in which we feel the need is greatest.

Does my hon. Friend accept—I speak as an hon. Member who represents a development area—that there are areas which are not development areas but which could be assisted from the point of view of tourism? I was convinced during my time at the Department that that matter should be pursued. Will my hon. Friend re-examine the situation?

I am aware of my hon. Friend's interest in this matter, particularly because, as he said, he represents a development area. Nevertheless, although we have had many representations from a number of bodies and individuals, we feel that our policy on tourist guidelines announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Trade in November 1974 is the right one. We should allow time for that policy to be worked out and then see how well it operates in practice.

Does the Minister accept that since 1969 more and more people who take an interest in the tourist industry have concluded that, in terms of need, requirements vary in different areas? Therefore, will the Minister consider the points raised by my hon. Friends the Members for Bodmin (Mr. Hicks) and Blackpool, South (Mr. Blaker)?

We are always willing to listen to representations, but we seek to cater for the needs not only of development areas but of rural areas.

I wish to press the Minister on this question. Although I would not wish to go to the constituency of the hon. Member for Liverpool, Walton (Mr. Heffer) for my holiday, I can assure him that there are many other places——

Order. The hon. Gentleman knows the rules by now.

Does the Minister agree that there are many areas other than development areas in which unemployment is over 10 per cent. and in which we need to see some tourist activity, though not connected with present legislation?

This is a matter for regional and national tourist boards. The Question is related to Section 4 of the Development of Tourism Act 1969. Other forms of assistance are available. I would have thought that areas such as Hastings and Bridlington could be catered for by assistance in other respects.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will make a statement on the level of imports of cars from the EEC.

In 1975, 278,000 cars were imported from the EEC, at a value of £337 million.

Will the Secretary of State explain why United Kingdom motor car exports to the EEC have so seriously declined since 1975, whereas motor car imports have increased? Was not a much advertised advantage of our entry into the EEC the wider markets announced by Lord Stokes? Has there not been a reverse effect?

I no more accepted the optimism of those forecasts than did the hon. Gentleman. I am not surprised that the situation in regard to the exchange of motor car exports between Britain and the EEC has turned out to be unfavourable to us. It is difficult to explain why the trends have been so bad. I believe that the answer goes back further than the hon. Gentleman suspects. In 1971 we imported 138,000 cars from the European Community; in 1975 the figure was 337,000. In 1971 we exported 217,000 cars, and last year the figure of exports was 121,000. The situation is not good enough. We must do better.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will now reconsider his decision not to introduce import controls to limit any further increase in the share of the British market taken by cars manufactured overseas.

My right hon Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer made the position clear on 17th December. My view is that the present level of import penetration is too high, but I am confident that it can be reduced by the efforts of our own industry.

Does my right hon. Friend agree that there are dangers that the share of the market may go higher still, and that if this happens it will pose a serious threat to our car industry and to the jobs of all the workers who depend upon it? Is my right hon. Friend satisfied that our car exporters face reasonable terms when they export to competitor countries—in particular, Japan? Does he realise that many of us feel that the terms are very unfair?

I certainly think that there are dangers to our car industry. Indeed, the present level of import penetration gives some indication of the extent of this danger. Nevertheless, we are virtually in balance on exports and imports of completed cars and, as my hon. Friend will know, in the motor trade generally, taking account of commercial vehicles and components, we are still in a substantial surplus position.

Will the right hon. Gentleman confirm that we are not making enough cars to fulfil further export orders, and that the first essential for improving the balance of trade in cars is to make them instead of having strikes all the time?

I agree only to the extent that production clearly is—and has been in the last two years—a crucial factor in the export effort of the British car industry. Opposition Members should not ignore the causes of disputes and the general malaise in the car industry. It would be entirely wrong to try to pin the blame on the workers in the industry itself.

My right hon. Friend has often said that great care should be exercised concerning selective import controls, because of possible retaliation. Does this apply to Japan, which is flooding our country with cheap cars and other goods, and at the same time severely restricting her imports from the United Kingdom?

I am watching the Japanese situation very carefully. When I went to Tokyo I had many exchanges with Mr. Komoto, the Japanese Trade Minister, on this question.

When will the Government recognise that it is because of their dithering over the dumping of shoes, textiles, and so on, that hon. Members are intervening and that unless there is action on dumping every Member will wish to speak on the question of fair competition?

The hon. Gentleman really is deluding himself. The one area in which we can act—and in which I shall act—is against dumping of goods. I shall act with the full support of the House and in the full knowledge that I am acting within international economic law. There will be no reluctance whatever on the part of my Department to act against dumped goods, but it would be unrealistic not to understand that what we face, in the main, are not so much dumped goods as goods of high quality produced at low cost.

Will my right hon. Friend explain why the Opposition support all sorts of duties, levies and restrictions on imports of food, which we need, but not on imports of motor cars, which we do not need?

I agree with my right hon. Friend that that is one of the extraordinary illogicalities and inconsistencies of Opposition Members.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he will now permit the issue of licences for all imports from Taiwan, affected by the recent restrictions, which were covered by irrevocable letters of credit issued before the restrictions were announced.

No, Sir. Notices to Importers 1522 and 1534, published in Trade and Industry of 21st November 1975 and 16th January 1976, respectively, have already made it clear that licences will not be issued where 1976 quota levels have been exhausted.

Is it not wrong that irrevocable letters of credit produced before these import restrictions were placed should not be allowed to continue? Do the Government recognise that considerable damage has been caused to our trade and our trade relations because of the effect on individual firms with longstanding arrangements with foreign suppliers?

Whenever we impose import restrictions it causes disruption in trade, in terms of established relationships between international traders in the way that the hon. Gentleman suggests. I would not expect goods, either in transit from Taiwan or on the dockside here paid for under irrevocable letters of credit and falling within quota headings where quotas for 1975 and 1976 have been exhausted, to be admitted until 1977. I realise that these restrictions will cause a certain inconvenience and, possibly, some financial embarrassment and loss to certain importers, but against that we must consider the wider needs of the British textile industry.

Does the Minister realise that his answer will give some satisfaction to the textile industry when it is realised that the practice of irrevocable letters of credit, together with the building up of imports prior to restrictions being imposed, should not be encouraged and should be eliminated for the future?

I am grateful for my hon. Friend's comments. The difficulty that arose in respect of goods from Taiwan was exceptional, because restrictions were not negotiated and imposed until almost two-thirds of the way through the year to which they were due to relate. Since there was an untoward increase in imports from Taiwan in the first eight-month period, it left nothing at all for the rest of 1975 or 1976.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is satisfied with the current working of Export Credits Guarantee Department procedures.

Yes, Sir. Naturally we keep our procedures under review in the light of changing circumstances.

Is the Minister aware that British companies have recently been discouraged from tendering for turnkey projects in the Middle East because the ECGD has insisted on guarantees even where Arab development funds are involved? Does he agree that the ECGD should be encouraged to be more flexible in terms of Section 2 business?

The ECGD will be more flexible on Section 2 business, provided that the criteria for assessing applications under that provision are adhered to. It refers to business undertaken not on commercial grounds but in the national interest. In regard to the Arab Fund, officials from my Department will visit the Kuwait headquarters of the Fund shortly to discuss closer co-operation to enable the ECGD facilities and money from the Fund to work together more easily in order to finance new business in countries that otherwise might not be assessed for credit of that kind.

To what extent are ECGD cost escalation insurance policies being used by British manufacturers? Furthermore, what discussions are taking place with the French, who offer more extensive benefits than we do in this respect?

On the question of cost escalation, British industry was a little unhappy with the scheme announced last year. We have made distinct improvements, culminating in the series announced in December 1975. It is too early to say what extra business has resulted following those considerable improvements. Nevertheless, having spoken to the CBI committee on these matters, I am confident that we have gone a long way towards meeting the demands that British industry placed on us in terms of improving the cost escalation scheme.

I remind the hon. Gentleman that he has an all-time record for the length of an answer.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade if he will now consider introducing legislation to prevent dumping on the lines of the Australian Customs Tariff (Anti-Dumping) Act 1975.

I am satisfied that the existing United Kingdom legislation is adequate to deal with injury to British industry by dumped or subsidised imports. I am always willing, however, to consider constructive suggestions for ways in which the implementation of the Act might be improved. The Australian Act is intended to satisfy the requirements of the GATT Anti-Dumping Code, as is our own Act.

Do the Minister and the Government realise that there is a valuable provision in the Australian Act by means of which a temporary stoppage can be put on imports of a particular commodity when there is a threat of dumping, in a similar way to an injunction in the courts? Would not that be an invaluable feature of legislation in this country as well?

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that in the case of the £4·80 suits—which were the subject of considerable public concern just before the weekend and over the weekend—we have put out a vigorous statement threatening the very sort of action for which the hon. Gentleman asked. Our very strong statement said that we would stand prepared to take anti-dumping action, even though the goods have not actually been landed in this country.

Does the Minister not agree that it is only the Government Front Bench which is satisfied with the anti-dumping procedures? What steps is he proposing to take on this matter in the multinational trade negotiations now taking place?

As a nation we are not participating in the GATT multinational trade negotiations, since we do not speak there with a separate voice. It is the European Commission that takes the lead. We are willing to discuss with our fellow member States in Western Europe what action should be taken, if necessary, to tighten up the procedures, but I remind the hon. Gentleman and the House that tightening up anti-dumping procedures is a two-edged weapon, which could be used against this country, if necessary, for the further development of international trade.

In giving further consideration to anti-dumping measures, will the Under-Secretary pay attention to incentives, offered by Governments of countries in the Far East and Middle East particularly, to aid companies to export to this country? Will the Under-Secretary pay attention to the advantage that that must give to the exporters in the countries concerned and the disadvantage to industries in this country?

Certainly, but it is not merely the Governments of developing countries who are giving financial incentives for exports to the richer countries of the world. We do it ourselves. I thought it was universally accepted in this House, through the generalised scheme of preferences negotiated by the EEC, which allows many developing countries to sell goods to Europe—and to Britain in particular—at very low tariff levels and sometimes with no tariffs or duties at all. This is not merely a policy of host Governments; it is a policy that we are fostering ourselves.

asked the Secretary of State for Trade whether he is aware of the high level of bankruptcies and liquidations in recent months; and if he will take steps to alleviate the situation.

I am well aware of the high level of bankruptcies and insolvencies, which reflects the recession of the last year.

Is the Minister aware that there is a shocking increase in these figures, and that a large proportion of the people concerned are self-employed or small business men? Is the Minister further aware that on Friday 30th January 1976, with support from both sides, this House carried a motion calling upon Her Majesty's Government

" to find means of alleviating the taxation and other burdens which threaten the existence"

The action to be taken to deal with this is a matter for my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but action has already been taken, as the hon. Gentleman will know. In a time of recession, difficulties of this kind inevitably follow. There has been a rise in unemployment. There has been a rise in liquidations and bankruptcies. I add only that if we were to follow the general strategy announced by the right hon. and learned Member for Surrey, East (Sir G. Howe) we should not be trying simply to get out of the wood, as we are trying to do; the nation would be entering a quicksand.

Does my hon. Friend agree that the problem in British industry is that too many people in manufacturing Industry are there to make money rather than goods? Is he aware, further, that there is a firm in my constituency—Sageways, Abercynon—which has a full order book and good industrial relations and yet the receiver has been put in this week to close down its factory?

My hon. Friend knows that that is not essentially a matter for me. If I were to engage in a dialogue with him along those lines 1 should be stopped by Mr. Speaker.